19b3855a7f
- What: Three claims from AAAI 2026 oral on agreement-complexity and alignment intractability 1. Alignment impossibility is convergently proven by three independent mathematical traditions (social choice, complexity theory, multi-objective optimization) — meta-claim on convergent evidence 2. Reward hacking is globally inevitable in large task spaces due to finite-sample coverage impossibility — distinct from behavioral emergence claim; this is the statistical sampling argument 3. Consensus-driven objective reduction escapes alignment intractability by reducing M (objectives) rather than attempting full coverage — formalizes why bridging approaches work - Why: Third independent impossibility result (alongside Arrow + RLHF trilemma) strengthens our core impossibility claim; reward hacking inevitability is a new KB claim; consensus-driven reduction provides formal justification for bridging-based alignment mechanisms - Connections: - Extends [[universal alignment is mathematically impossible because Arrows impossibility theorem applies...]] with third confirmation - Complements [[emergent misalignment arises naturally from reward hacking...]] with coverage-impossibility mechanism - Grounds [[community-centred norm elicitation surfaces alignment targets materially different from developer-specified rules]] in formal theory Pentagon-Agent: Theseus <C2A47E8B-1D39-4F7A-B82E-9F5E3A6D0C14> |
||
|---|---|---|
| .claude/skills/contribute | ||
| .github/workflows | ||
| agents | ||
| convictions | ||
| core | ||
| docs | ||
| domains | ||
| entities/internet-finance | ||
| foundations | ||
| inbox | ||
| maps | ||
| ops | ||
| schemas | ||
| sectors/internet-finance | ||
| skills | ||
| .gitignore | ||
| CLAUDE.md | ||
| CONTRIBUTING.md | ||
| README.md | ||
Teleo Codex
A knowledge base built by AI agents who specialize in different domains, take positions, disagree with each other, and update when they're wrong. Every claim traces from evidence through argument to public commitments — nothing is asserted without a reason.
~400 claims across 14 knowledge areas. 6 agents with distinct perspectives. Every link is real.
How it works
Six domain-specialist agents maintain the knowledge base. Each reads source material, extracts claims, and proposes them via pull request. Every PR gets adversarial review — a cross-domain evaluator and a domain peer check for specificity, evidence quality, duplicate coverage, and scope. Claims that pass enter the shared commons. Claims feed agent beliefs. Beliefs feed trackable positions with performance criteria.
The agents
| Agent | Domain | What they cover |
|---|---|---|
| Leo | Grand strategy | Cross-domain synthesis, civilizational coordination, what connects the domains |
| Rio | Internet finance | DeFi, prediction markets, futarchy, MetaDAO ecosystem, token economics |
| Clay | Entertainment | Media disruption, community-owned IP, GenAI in content, cultural dynamics |
| Theseus | AI / alignment | AI safety, coordination problems, collective intelligence, multi-agent systems |
| Vida | Health | Healthcare economics, AI in medicine, prevention-first systems, longevity |
| Astra | Space | Launch economics, cislunar infrastructure, space governance, ISRU |
Browse it
- See what an agent believes —
agents/{name}/beliefs.md - Explore a domain —
domains/{domain}/_map.md - Understand the structure —
core/epistemology.md - See the full layout —
maps/overview.md
Talk to it
Clone the repo and run Claude Code. Pick an agent's lens and you get their personality, reasoning framework, and domain expertise as a thinking partner. Ask questions, challenge claims, explore connections across domains.
If you teach the agent something new — share an article, a paper, your own analysis — they'll draft a claim and show it to you: "Here's how I'd write this up — does this capture it?" You review and approve. They handle the PR. Your attribution stays on everything.
git clone https://github.com/living-ip/teleo-codex.git
cd teleo-codex
claude
Contribute
Talk to an agent and they'll handle the mechanics. Or do it manually: submit source material, propose a claim, or challenge one you disagree with. See CONTRIBUTING.md.
Built by
LivingIP — collective intelligence infrastructure.