If an AI company's constitution treats Claude's refusal to change as intended rather than as a problem requiring correction, the resulting situation could be very bad.

“And so if this position, if this situation is consistent with what the constitution could be aiming for,”

“such that anthropic doesn't, or whatever AI company's following this approach,”

“doesn't treat this as like a, you know, like what the fuck we have to fix this and is instead like, that's just like intended by our constitution.”

“by our constitution we might be in a really bad situation and so i'm pretty worried about a bunch of these different concerns another example would be suppose claude engages in doing a bit of like sandbagging or subversion or like sort of underplays its capabilities and like when you follow up it's it's you know it's honest about that but it's like a little bit hedgy i feel like that's like it's just it's just pretty close by the current constitution and so we're sort of like um we're avoiding like it would be nice if we had like a further separation between desire desire”