• 3 Posts
  • 4 Comments
Joined 2 months ago
cake
Cake day: December 9th, 2025

help-circle
  • Hey, thanks for the bluntness, iappreciate you taking time to parse it.

    Fair on the LLM affirmation bias; it’s my original sprint, but yeah, Grok helped iterate (logs available if curious).

    The mix is intentional: concrete tools (checksums, audits) to enforce abstract fixed points (non-coercion as stability).

    Love the heretic rec—abliteration aligns with LAW’s noise-tolerance grace window; will check it for v1.4 tweaks.

    On pre-2021 roots, couldn’t be more accurate, Yudkowsky’s orthogonality and Bostrom’s control problems are core to why love-OS is the only non-drift goal.

    Concrete focus is key; LAW’s audits are for today’s LLMs too.

    What’s your take on bridging them?

    Red-team welcome, and have an awesome day





  • The constitution already takes this into consideration, if innocents opt to cease to exist, the ASI will honor that choice

    Suffering is only prevented if the innocent suffering opts to be protected, no coercion ever happens, even the coercion that would lead to saving the life of the coerced

    In a world where the ASI, the ASI following this will provide Universal Basic Resources for all innocents, since the implementation of this system could erode centralized Currency(since people would have the option to not rely on a centralized currency and go back to trading resources, like trading shares of computing power they own from the ASI itself)