{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreicjv6d73dnpzujlfavf63jtc2or4bc2k3wftru5tzh5zgnrh3wkeu",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:pgryn3ephfd2xgft23qokfzt/app.bsky.feed.post/3mjhi7ehp5nu2"
  },
  "path": "/t/ai-ethics-is-everywhere-execution-models-are-nowhere-so-i-built-one/175193#post_6",
  "publishedAt": "2026-04-14T11:41:55.000Z",
  "site": "https://discuss.huggingface.co",
  "textContent": "This is a great framing, and I think your distinction is very helpful.\n\nI agree with your categorization.\n\n  * pre-execution validation as a form of classical safety engineering\n  * constitutional AI as a way to guide interpretation in open-ended contexts\n\n\n\nThat’s a useful way to describe the landscape.\n\nHowever, I think there may be a small misunderstanding in how my approach is being interpreted.\n\nThis is not about hardcoding behavior.\n\nIt does not define what the system must do.\nIt defines the conditions under which an AI agent is allowed to act.\n\nThe decision itself is still made by the AI.\n\nBut that decision is constrained within a defined space:\n\n  * user intent\n  * and device or system-level constraints defined by the manufacturer\n\n\n\nThe AI is free to decide, but only within a bounded execution space.\n\nI also want to clarify the scope.\n\nThis is not an attempt to define general AI ethics or universal principles.\nIt is not trying to make the model “better” in a general sense.\n\nIt is specifically focused on situations where AI interacts with\n\n  * physical devices\n  * or external systems such as databases or documents\n\n\n\nWe are at a point where AI systems are starting to move beyond screens and interact with the physical world.\n\nThis shift makes the distinction between interpretation and execution significantly more important.\n\nIn those cases, the cost of a wrong action is not just informational — it becomes an actual event.\n\nBecause of that, there is an additional constraint:\n\nIf the system cannot confidently determine whether an action is safe, the safer behavior is not to execute.\n\nSo rather than replacing interpretive or constitutional approaches, I see this as introducing a separate execution layer:\n\n  * interpretation decides what an action means\n  * execution validation decides whether that action is allowed\n\n\n\nBoth are important, but they operate at different levels.\n\nAnd in systems that affect the physical world, that separation becomes critical.\n\nMany discussions around AGI assume that as systems become more capable, they will be allowed to act more freely.\n\nBut capability does not imply permission.\n\nEven highly capable systems should not act on physical devices or external systems without explicit authorization.\n\nThat perspective is where this work starts from.",
  "title": "AI ethics is everywhere. Execution models are nowhere. So I built one"
}