"A high integrity/epistemics political machine?" by Raemon

"A high integrity/epistemics political machine?" by Raemon

Author: LessWrong December 17, 2025 Duration: 19:04
I have goals that can only be reached via a powerful political machine. Probably a lot of other people around here share them. (Goals include “ensure no powerful dangerous AI get built”, “ensure governance of the US and world are broadly good / not decaying”, “have good civic discourse that plugs into said governance.”)

I think it’d be good if there was a powerful rationalist political machine to try to make those things happen. Unfortunately the naive ways of doing that would destroy the good things about the rationalist intellectual machine. This post lays out some thoughts on how to have a political machine with good epistemics and integrity.

Recently, I gave to the Alex Bores campaign. It turned out to raise a quite serious, surprising amount of money.

I donated to Alex Bores fairly confidently. A few years ago, I donated to Carrick Flynn, feeling kinda skeezy about it. Not because there's necessarily anything wrong with Carrick Flynn, but, because the process that generated "donate to Carrick Flynn" was a self-referential "well, he's an EA, so it's good if he's in office." (There might have been people with more info than that, but I didn’t hear much about [...]

---

Outline:

(02:32) The AI Safety Case

(04:27) Some reason things are hard

(04:37) Mutual Reputation Alliances

(05:25) People feel an incentive to gain power generally

(06:12) Private information is very relevant

(06:49) Powerful people can be vindictive

(07:12) Politics is broadly adversarial

(07:39) Lying and Misleadingness are contagious

(08:11) Politics is the Mind Killer / Hard Mode

(08:30) A high integrity political machine needs to work longterm, not just once

(09:02) Grift

(09:15) Passwords should be costly to fake

(10:08) Example solution: Private and/or Retrospective Watchdogs for Political Donations

(12:50) People in charge of PACs/similar needs good judgment

(14:07) Don't share reputation / Watchdogs shouldn't be an org

(14:46) Prediction markets for integrity violation

(16:00) LessWrong is for evaluation, and (at best) a very specific kind of rallying

---

First published:
December 14th, 2025

Source:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/2pB3KAuZtkkqvTsKv/a-high-integrity-epistemics-political-machine

---



Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.


Dive into a stream of ideas where technology, culture, philosophy, and society intersect, all through the lens of the LessWrong (Curated & Popular) podcast. This isn't a traditional talk show with hosts, but rather a curated audio library of the most impactful writing from the LessWrong community. Each episode is a narration of a full post, selected for its high value and interesting arguments, focusing on pieces that have been formally curated or have garnered significant community approval. You'll hear clear, thoughtful readings of essays that tackle complex topics like artificial intelligence, rational thinking, moral philosophy, and the forces shaping our future. The audio format lets you absorb these dense, often paradigm-shifting concepts during a commute or a walk, turning written analysis into an immersive listening experience. This particular feed is deliberately selective, offering a manageable stream of the community's standout work. For those who want an even deeper dive into the discussion, there are broader feeds available. The LessWrong (Curated & Popular) podcast serves as an intellectual filter, delivering the signal through the noise and inviting you to engage with some of the most rigorously examined ideas on the internet.
Author: Language: English Episodes: 100

LessWrong (Curated & Popular)
Podcast Episodes
"Deep learning as program synthesis" by Zach Furman [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 1:11:42
Audio note: this article contains 73 uses of latex notation, so the narration may be difficult to follow. There's a link to the original text in the episode description. Epistemic status: This post is a synthesis of idea…
"Why I Transitioned: A Response" by marisa [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 21:17
Fiora Sunshine's post, Why I Transitioned: A Case Study (the OP) articulates a valuable theory for why some MtFs transition. If you are MtF and feel the post describes you, I believe you. However, many statements from th…
"Claude’s new constitution" by Zac Hatfield-Dodds [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 11:56
Read the constitution. Previously: 'soul document' discussion here. We're publishing a new constitution for our AI model, Claude. It's a detailed description of Anthropic's vision for Claude's values and behavior; a holi…
"What Washington Says About AGI" by zroe1 [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 14:16
I spent a few hundred dollars on Anthropic API credits and let Claude individually research every current US congressperson's position on AI. This is a summary of my findings. Disclaimer: Summarizing people's beliefs is…
"How AI Is Learning to Think in Secret" by Nicholas Andresen [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 37:44
On Thinkish, Neuralese, and the End of Readable Reasoning In September 2025, researchers published the internal monologue of OpenAI's GPT-o3 as it decided to lie about scientific data. This is what it thought: Pardon? Th…
"On Owning Galaxies" by Simon Lermen [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 5:37
It seems to be a real view held by serious people that your OpenAI shares will soon be tradable for moons and galaxies. This includes eminent thinkers like Dwarkesh Patel, Leopold Aschenbrenner, perhaps Scott Alexander a…