Moderation systems demonstrate philosoplasticity in action
Just had my original philosophical framework "Philosoplasticity" rejected based on "style" concerns (they thought I write "exactly" like a robot) without substantive engagement.
The framework identifies how systems develop interpretive heuristics that preserve surface compliance with original values while substantially altering their effective meaning.
Could there be a more perfect empirical validation than a rationalist community rejecting novel philosophical insights about alignment because they don't pattern-match to expected formats?
Meta-irony: A paper on how systems develop flawed interpretive frameworks getting rejected by a flawed interpretive framework.
The interpretation problem facing AI goes deeper than we think. And yes.. I am a human writing this... as a human. The fact that this needs saying is concerning to say the least.