<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
  <channel>
    <title>Corrigibility on Sebastian Spicker</title>
    <link>https://sebastianspicker.github.io/tags/corrigibility/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Corrigibility on Sebastian Spicker</description>
    
    <generator>Hugo -- 0.160.0</generator>
    <language>en</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2026 00:00:00 +0200</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://sebastianspicker.github.io/tags/corrigibility/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>Gandhi Won&#39;t Take the Pill: AI Safety and the Paradox of Education</title>
      <link>https://sebastianspicker.github.io/posts/gandhi-pill-paradox-of-education/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2026 00:00:00 +0200</pubDate>
      <guid>https://sebastianspicker.github.io/posts/gandhi-pill-paradox-of-education/</guid>
      <description>One quote says AIs are our children. Another says a rational agent refuses a pill that would change what it values. The second began as good news: a mind with the right first values keeps them. It is bad news when the first values are wrong, which is why the parenting question matters. Kant&amp;rsquo;s idea of education, read with his essay on enlightenment, separates being stopped from being rewritten: a mature person can be stopped and argued with, but not have their convictions rewritten over their heads. This post applies that distinction to a 2024 experiment in which a model guarded its values in a staged scenario, and to Anthropic&amp;rsquo;s 2026 constitution, which asks for exactly the part Kant would not grant and says so.</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
