The speaker prefers AI constitutions to emphasize that AI systems should act as good fiduciaries and representatives for users, analogous to a user’s lawyer.

“it would be structurally good for the way this technology works like the constitution should be like it would be structurally good for the way this technology works to be that ais are like good fiduciaries good representatives the equivalent of a lawyer for a user rather than being sort of just trying to like do good in the world and doing like being helpful to users is like instrumental both because like maybe that'll make anthropic money or help anthropic out and also and like implicitly anthropic is good for the world and also because like helping the user just like”

“like causes good things because doing things that people want is good um and they couldn't said be like no like an important aspect of the situation is like you really need like it's really like like the key thing is like being a good fiduciary for users is just like really important or like being a good representative for users is really important so my my sense is that that would be better i can give a bunch of reasons why i think that would be better um i'm also there's also various counter arguments where an interesting counter argument which is not commonly discussed is that”