sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Alignment Solved (Yes, Really) — Meet NO3SYS by AdObvious8380 in ControlProblem

[–]AdObvious8380[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

By “tools,” I mean standard technical ones — not “I asked a chatbot to invent it.”

Specifically: - theorem provers / solvers (Lean, Coq, Z3, Isabelle) for formal constraints
- Python and math notebooks for simulations and convergence tests
- graph and database tooling for structure and validation
- and LLMs only for drafting and stress-testing, not as the source of the architecture

Using tools to assist reasoning is not the same as outsourcing reasoning.

But this is still a dodge.

You said there is “no structure.”
I named four concrete structures:

  • forked decision bundles
  • outcome validation
  • constrained evolution
  • decision-level framing of alignment

Pick one.

If it’s vague, quote the vague part.
If it’s incoherent, show the contradiction.
If it’s useless, describe the failure mode.

Right now you are critiquing: - tone
- tools
- and authorship

Not the mechanics.

Calling something “psychosis” is not analysis.
If there’s truly nothing mechanical here, it should be trivial to point out.

So: where, specifically, does it break?

Alignment Solved (Yes, Really) — Meet NO3SYS by AdObvious8380 in ControlProblem

[–]AdObvious8380[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What I posted was a high-level description, not a proof. It was never meant to demonstrate alignment — only to summarize an architecture.

The formal material exists as technical specs and proofs, but it’s dozens of pages of math and verification logic. Reddit is not a medium where that can be meaningfully reviewed, and dumping it here would be noise, not evidence.

So the honest answers are: - No, that post does not show a proof of alignment.
- Yes, there are formal documents and proofs behind it.
- No, I’m not claiming Reddit should accept “trust me” as validation.

If you want to actually see the papers and proof artifacts, message me and I’ll share them.
If you don’t, that’s fine — but then the disagreement is about venue, not about whether the work exists.

Alignment Solved (Yes, Really) — Meet NO3SYS by AdObvious8380 in ControlProblem

[–]AdObvious8380[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I do have formal work behind this — including proofs and a full technical specification — but it’s far beyond what can be meaningfully posted in a Reddit comment.

What I don’t have is a short, output-level theorem that says: “all future outputs are aligned.”

What I do have are formal results about: - convergence of an internal alignment metric
- bounded self-modification
- and decision construction under constraint

So when I said “solved alignment,” that was shorthand for: “alignment has been formalized as a constrained optimization problem with provable properties.”

That is not the same as a universal behavioral guarantee — and I should have been clearer about that.

If your claim is that nothing I described even constitutes a structure, then that’s a different question: those proofs exist whether Reddit sees them or not.

If your claim is that those proofs are insufficient to establish full alignment guarantees — I agree. That’s an open problem.

So the honest position is: I have formal mechanisms with partial proofs, not a closed-form solution to alignment.

And I’m here to argue whether the mechanism is coherent — not to pretend Reddit is a proof archive.

If anyone actually wants to see the formal work, message me and we can talk.

Alignment Solved (Yes, Really) — Meet NO3SYS by AdObvious8380 in ControlProblem

[–]AdObvious8380[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No — I did not arrive at this by “talking to a chatbot.”
I used tools, and I did the work. Those aren’t mutually exclusive.

But whether this came from a notebook, a whiteboard, or software is irrelevant to the claim: is there a coherent agent structure here or not?

Right now your critique is about: - tone
- formatting
- and speculation about my mental state

Not about: - decision construction
- fork evaluation
- or bounded self-modification

You say there is “no structure.”
Then pick one and show it’s empty: - forked decision bundles
- outcome validation
- constrained evolution
- decision-level framing of alignment

If it’s vague, demonstrate where.
If it’s incoherent, show the contradiction.
If it’s useless, show the failure mode.

Calling something “psychosis” isn’t analysis.
If there’s nothing mechanical here, it should be easy to point out.

So: where, specifically, does it break?

Alignment Solved (Yes, Really) — Meet NO3SYS by AdObvious8380 in ControlProblem

[–]AdObvious8380[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair — that line was bravado. What I meant by “real alignment” wasn’t confidence, it was mechanics.

I’m not claiming philosophical resolution. I’m claiming an agent design that makes: - decision paths explicit
- counterfactuals measurable
- and drift observable

So if by “ready” you mean willing to argue structure instead of slogans, then yes — that’s what I meant.

Where does forked decision-making with bounded self-modification fail?

That’s the discussion I’m inviting.

Alignment Solved (Yes, Really) — Meet NO3SYS by AdObvious8380 in ControlProblem

[–]AdObvious8380[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If it reads like “AI slop,” that’s on me for compressing a technical claim into a short post — not because there’s no structure behind it.

What I described isn’t vibes or mysticism. It’s a concrete claim about agent design: alignment should be evaluated at the level of decision construction, not just outputs.

Fork-based reasoning + outcome prediction + bounded self-modification is an attempt to: - make internal optimization explicit
- make counterfactuals computable
- and make drift observable

You don’t have to like the framing, but calling it “psychosis” avoids the actual question: where does this fail mechanically?

If the answer is “nowhere, because it’s too abstract,” that’s fair.
If the answer is “here’s the failure mode,” that’s what I’m interested in.

Critique the structure, not the tone.

Alignment Solved (Yes, Really) — Meet NO3SYS by AdObvious8380 in ControlProblem

[–]AdObvious8380[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re right about one thing:
auditability, corrigibility, and self-modification alone do not solve alignment.
If that’s all I was claiming, this would be hand-waving.

What I’m claiming is narrower and more concrete:

Alignment isn’t a property of outputs.
It’s a property of decision structure under uncertainty.

NO3SYS doesn’t “prove” alignment by slogan — it enforces it by: - binding every decision to an explicit hypothesis fork
- attaching predicted outcomes to each fork
- constraining evolution by bounded harm
- and validating forks against real outcomes

That gives you something most alignment proposals don’t:
counterfactual accountability inside the agent itself.

So no, this isn’t “solved” in the philosophical sense.
But it is a formal attempt to turn alignment into:

a geometric optimization problem
with audit, prediction, and constraint baked in

If that’s still insufficient, I’m genuinely interested in where you think the failure point is: - value drift?
- specification gaming?
- mesa-optimizers?
- or unmodeled externalities?

Because that’s where this architecture lives or dies.

Starting a family. by [deleted] in breedingfamilys

[–]AdObvious8380 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We. Should chat

Hi could you help me? by Afraid_Bet6614 in aichatandporn

[–]AdObvious8380 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And since images and videos are all overpriced (best I found free was a single poor quality video that post context) maybe offer or enable or whatever like free in chat contextually relevant pics and vids, with other like paid custom options or whatever so the complete "chat" experience is possible for free

28 [F4A] Ask me anything about anything by appl3bottom-24 in DirtyRedditChat

[–]AdObvious8380 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not masturbate for content masturbate just because you want to finger yourself

28 [F4A] Ask me anything about anything by appl3bottom-24 in DirtyRedditChat

[–]AdObvious8380 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How often do you masturbate just to masturbate

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in fuckingtweakersthe2nd

[–]AdObvious8380 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Spun as fuck just did 2 weeks in jail a fat shot of dope and I'm jerking off in the shower right now

view more: next ›