Longterm Wiki

Enhancement Queue

This page tracks which pages need enhancement to match their respective style guides. Use this to prioritize work and avoid duplicate effort.


Quick Stats

Content TypePendingIn ProgressCompleteStyle Guide
Models≈26029Model Style Guide
Risks≈3400KB Style Guide
Responses≈4001KB Style Guide

Enhancement Queues

High Priority (quality < 3)

PageQualityStatusNotes
mesa-optimization2PendingNeeds significant work

Accident Risks

PageStatus
corrigibility-failurePending
distributional-shiftPending
emergent-capabilitiesPending
goal-misgeneralizationPending
instrumental-convergencePending
power-seekingPending
reward-hackingPending
sandbaggingPending
schemingPending
sharp-left-turnPending
sycophancyPending
treacherous-turnPending

Misuse Risks

PageStatus
autonomous-weaponsPending
deepfakesPending
disinformationPending
fraudPending
surveillancePending

Structural Risks

PageStatus
concentration-of-powerPending
enfeeblementPending
erosion-of-agencyPending
lock-inPending

Epistemic Risks

PageStatus
epistemic-collapsePending
institutional-capturePending
knowledge-monopolyPending
learned-helplessnessPending
reality-fragmentationPending
trust-cascadePending

Already High Quality (quality 4+)

These are lower priority but could still benefit from kb-2.0 alignment:

PageQualityStatus
authoritarian-takeover4Pending
bioweapons4Pending
cyber-psychosis4Pending
cyberweapons4Pending
deceptive-alignment4Pending
legal-evidence-crisis4Pending

How to Use This

For Claude Code Sessions

  1. Pick 3-5 items marked "Pending" from one category
  2. Update their status to "In Progress" in this file
  3. Enhance the pages following the style guide
  4. Mark as "Complete" when done
  5. Commit changes

Enhancement Checklist

For All Pages (Common Writing Principles):

  • No insider jargon ("EA money", "non-EA causes") — use descriptive terms
  • Estimates use ranges, not point values; labeled "Est." or "Approx."
  • Analytical tone, not prescriptive ("this suggests..." not "we recommend...")
  • Counter-arguments included for key claims
  • objectivity rating in frontmatter

For Risk Pages (kb-2.0):

  • 2-3 paragraph Overview
  • Risk Assessment table (Severity, Likelihood, Timeline)
  • Responses That Address This Risk table
  • Why This Matters section
  • Key Uncertainties section
  • Proper h2/h3 hierarchy
  • styleGuideVersion: "kb-2.0" in frontmatter

For Response Pages (kb-2.0):

  • 2-3 paragraph Overview
  • Quick Assessment table
  • Risks Addressed table
  • How It Works section
  • Critical Assessment section
  • Getting Involved section
  • Proper h2/h3 hierarchy
  • styleGuideVersion: "kb-2.0" in frontmatter

For Model Pages:

  • Overview with flowing prose
  • Mermaid diagram
  • Quantitative tables with estimates/ranges
  • Scenario analysis
  • Limitations section
  • "Why These Numbers Might Be Wrong" section (for CE estimates)
  • Ratings in frontmatter (including objectivity)