[xodjmk]

The article completely misunderstand the argument, and leaves out the actual important pieces. The argument is that allowing/incentivising some hypothetical AGI to pursue a certain ideology, like trying to inject someone's idea of 'social justice' into the world would pose the risk of allowing this AGI to lie and manipulate humans as subjects and we would lose control. If the incentive is to 'maximally seek truth', then this might be more likely to align with a future that values human life, in the same way that we value animals and appreciate the raw nature, without trying to intervene and change their instinctual behavior. Like trying to biologically modify lions to be vegan, vs. respecting the brutal reality of predator vs. prey. Whether this hypothetical idea is correct or not is debatable, but the article clearly misses the point.