Monthly Archives: October 2025

EP 327 Nate Soares on Why Superhuman AI Would Kill Us All



Jim talks with Nate Soares about the ideas in his and Eliezer Yudkowsky’s book If Anybody Builds It, Everyone Dies: Why Superhuman AI Would Kill Us All. They discuss the book’s claim that mitigating existential AI risk should be a top global priority, the idea that LLMs are grown, the opacity of deep learning networks, the Golden Gate activation vector, whether our understanding of deep learning networks might improve enough to prevent catastrophe, goodness as a narrow target, the alignment problem, the problem of pointing minds, whether LLMs are just stochastic parrots, why predicting a corpus often requires more mental machinery than creating a corpus, depth & generalization of skills, wanting as an effective strategy, goal orientation, limitations of training goal pursuit, transient limitations of current AI, protein folding and AlphaFold, the riskiness of automating alignment research, the correlation between capability and more coherent drives, why the authors anchored their argument on transformers & LLMs, the inversion of Moravec’s paradox, the geopolitical multipolar trap, making world leaders aware of the issues, a treaty to ban the race to superintelligence, the specific terms of the proposed treaty, a comparison with banning uranium enrichment, why Jim tentatively thinks this proposal is a mistake, a priesthood of the power supply, whether attention is a zero-sum game, and much more.

Nate Soares is the President of the Machine Intelligence Research Institute. He has been working in the field for over a decade, after previous experience at Microsoft and Google. Soares is the author of a large body of technical and semi-technical writing on AI alignment, including foundational work on value learning, decision theory, and power-seeking incentives in smarter-than-human AIs.


EP 326 Alex Ebert on New Age, Manifestation, and Collective Hallucination



Jim talks with Alex Ebert about the ideas in his Substack essay “New Age and the Religion of Self: The Anatomy of a Rebellion Against Reality.” They discuss the meanings of New Age and religion, the New Thought movement, the law of attraction, manifesting, Trump’s artifacts of manifestation, the unmooring from concrete artifacts, individual and collective hallucinations, intersubjective verification of the interobjective, the subjective-first perspective, epistemic asymmetry as the cool, New Ageism’s constant reference to quantum physics, manifesting as a way to negate social responsibility, the odd coincidence of leaving the gold standard and New Ageism, spiritual bypassing, a global derealization, new retribalized collective delusions, the Faustian bargain of AI, rationality as a virus, the noble lie, indeterminacy as a sign of emergence, nostalgia as a sales pitch, regaining the sense of hypocrisy, localized retribalizations, GameB as a series of membranes, and much more.

Alex Ebert is a platinum-selling musician (Edward Sharpe and The Magnetic Zeros), Golden Globe-winning film composer, cultural critic and philosopher living in New Orleans. His philosophical project, FreQ Theory, as well as his cultural analyses, can be followed on his Substack.


EP 325 Joe Edelman on Full-Stack AI Alignment



Jim talks with Joe Edelman about the ideas in the Meaning Alignment Institute’s recent paper “Full Stack Alignment: Co-Aligning AI and Institutions with Thick Models of Value.” They discuss pluralism as a core principle in designing social systems, the informational basis for alignment, how preferential models fail to capture what people truly care about, the limitations of markets and voting as preference-based systems, critiques of text-based approaches in LLMs, thick models of value, values as attentional policies, AI assistants as potential vectors for manipulation, the need for reputation systems and factual grounding, the “super negotiator” project for better contract negotiation, multipolar traps, moral graph elicitation, starting with membranes, Moloch-free zones, unintended consequences and lessons from early Internet optimism, concentration of power as a key danger, co-optation risks, and much more.

Joe Edelman has spent much of his life trying to understand how ML systems and markets could change, retaining their many benefits but avoiding their characteristic problems: of atomization, and of servicing shallow desires over deeper needs. Along the way this led him to formulate theories of human meaning and values (https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.10636) and study models of societal transformation (https://www.full-stack-alignment.ai/paper) as well as inventing the meaning-based metrics used at CouchSurfing, Facebook, and Apple, co-founding the Center for Humane Technology and the Meaning Alignment Institute, and inventing new democratic systems (https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.10636). He’s currently one of the PIs leading the Full-Stack Alignment program at the Meaning Alignment Institute, with a network of more than 50 researchers at universities and corporate labs working on these issues.