Geoffrey Irving @geoffreyirving
— saved image
Geoffrey Irving @geoffreyirving · 2h It is even possible Paul's influence will buy us another warning shot. It is increasingly difficult to monitor agent behavior, and it is possible that the next agent swarm goes entirely unnoticed. More care around monitoring could make the difference between detection and not. (1 reply · 5 likes · 104 views) Geoffrey Irving @geoffreyirving · 2h If we get more time, we can spend it! Both Paul's day-job alignment work and that at @resolution_org and similar orgs will give us attempts at more rigorous alignment, and pauses and reversals can also mean that AI developer are better incentivized to aim for higher confidence. (1 reply · 5 likes · 101 views) Geoffrey Irving @geoffreyirving · 2h Currently, the pressure at AI companies to do emergency safety patching at the expense of work that will hold up to superintelligence is too strong, so the latter does not happen. (1 reply · 6 likes · 207 views) Daniel Murfet reposted Geoffrey Irving @geoffreyirving I talked to a recent AI safety leader at a company who described the org chart as 1. Team A works on aligning the next model. 2. Team B works on aligning the model after that. No one was working on aligning later models. 10:48 AM · Sep 9, 2026 · 302 Views
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
Screenshot of part of a Geoffrey Irving thread, with the earlier posts shown above and the thread's root post (reposted by Daniel Murfet) at the bottom. It covers agent-swarm monitoring and warning shots, spending extra time on more rigorous alignment, emergency safety patching crowding out superintelligence-robust work, and an anecdote that a lab's alignment org chart had no team working on aligning later models. The bottom is partly overlaid by the phone's navigation bar.
geoffrey irvingalignmentwarning shotsagent swarmsmonitoringsafety patchingai labspauses