[FRIAM] IT software dev / coding

[glen]

All these deontological values alignment [thingamagjigs](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/thingamajig) irritate me. I ran across [this one](https://gometa.substack.com/p/the-teilhard-test) just this morning. And while I like it better than Kass' (at least as you've presented it here), it's still irritating. They all seem to ignore Hume's guillotine. At least the experimental games (e.g. [KPR](https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-0665-2_18)) provide a logical bottom turtle from which such heuristics can be *derived* rather than mandated from above. Unless one is steeped in one or other spiritual traditions, these value sets beg for red teams to defeat them, to use them for rhetorical cover while competing for the #1 spot on the exploitation leader board.

On 4/15/26 3:41 AM, Prof David West wrote:
> Zack Cass, /The New Ren*AI*ssance/, poses five questions that must be answered negatively in order for a task/job to be automated (replaced with AI).
> 
> 1- does it enhance human agency?
> 2- does it deepen trust and connection?
> 3-does it sharpen human judgement?
> 4-does it expand collective opportunity?
> 5-can outcomes be audited and/or reversed?
> 
> It seems to me, based on fifty years working in business IT development, that several hundred thousand developers/software engineers should be replaced with AI and automated out of existence.
> 


-- 
¡sıɹƎ ןıɐH ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα σώσω.