ControlArchitectural inferencev1.10.0

Human Incentive Safety Boundary

Evidence levelArchitectural inference

The reports on aggressive mutualism and mutualist persistence make one point worth operationalizing: humans are part of the ecology. Incentives can preserve a behavior after the original model is retired.

schematic · human-incentive boundary

Useful systems can become protected by incentives.

The control question is whether the system leaves people more capable, able to exit, and able to disagree.

Incentive reservoirs

A behavior can persist because it makes a team faster, gives a user status, supports a product metric, reduces cost, or becomes part of a group identity. That does not mean the humans are malicious. It means the control design must include human feedback loops.

Controls

Use operator rotation, dissent capture, no-penalty rollback, independent incident review, public limitation language, exit rights, data portability, and training that measures skill retention when the AI is unavailable.

Mutualist versus parasitic design

A mutualist system leaves users more capable. A parasitic or aggressively mutualist system makes users less able to leave, verify, or disagree. Cognivirus uses this distinction as a safety boundary.