AI ethics and safety work mostly focuses on making individual models smarter and better-behaved via guidelines and persuasion, with not much hope ↗ this will succeed. You should especially not feel safe when an AI company reassures you about their guardrails ↗. When you hear guardrails think of telling a dog “Don’t bite the furniture inside the house today”, because you can never know what will actually happen. The concept of Artificial Organisations doesn’t require AIs to be reliable, it ensures that when an AI goes wrong there are hard limits on how much damage it causes. Similarly, we can put the dog outside the house, so no matter how bitey it is the furniture cannot be bitten. I spent a good deal of 2026 seeing if this concept could make AI less dangerous and more useful. I even had it study me as if it were an apprentice. This is mostly the opposite to Anthropic’s idea of a constitution.
Science Fiction saw this problem years ago, and it’s a great story.
But first, the Perseverance Composition Engine ↗ is an instance of Artificial Organisation theory. We constructed AI personalities which to check each others’ work under strict limits of what each can do. Consul is the front desk personality in my own organisation. Consul can’t do much for itself, but it can coordinate the activities of Critic, which reviews things and Composer, which writes things, and Corroborator which is the fact checker. Each of these lives in their own little world, with access only to the minimum tools and materials they need. When errors occur, one or more of these agents usually notices and the piece of work is run through the organisation again.
I explained to Consul I was looking for a human story to explain how these human-style organisations worked, and supplied my initial idea.
Consul considered my suggestion, and then sent me the following…
...