All of CS234 assumes the reward is given. The Winter 2026 ethics and society guest lecture (Wanheng Hu, based on material originally developed by Dan Webber) asks, over two sessions, what you really want. The first session splits "alignment" into three targets: the user's intentions, revealed preferences, and objective best interests, with RLHF-driven sycophancy and a personal AI agent as case studies. The second adds a fourth target, what is morally right for people besides the user, and compares three routes: top-down (write principles down), bottom-up (learn from examples), and participatory AI. There's no silver bullet, but alignment can be better or worse.
The first half of L06 is about ethics. Yen-Lung Tsai quotes Karpathy's line that hallucination is a feature of LLMs, then works through plagiarism, whether your data gets used for training, and DeepSeek's censorship and corpus skew, and closes with seven principles of responsible use. The second half is about applications: give the model the right information and clear instructions, and one system prompt becomes a Lucky Vicky positivity generator, a social-media copywriter, or a biased college-major counselor. The week-6 assignment moves that prompt into an OpenAI-compatible API with a Gradio front end: a chatbot with a persona.
HW6 Problem 3 (20 pts) has you write a tabular Q-learning agent for Swingy Monkey, a Flappy Bird-like game. The minimum bar is scoring over 50 at least once within 100 epochs, plus one improvement of your choice. Problem 5 (10 pts) is a 250-word ethics question: assuming a social platform's users grow more politically extreme, use RL concepts to explain how the choice of reward function might have contributed.
HW6 combines generalization, MLE/MAP, probabilistic learning, fairness metrics, and social impact in one written assignment about assumptions and tradeoffs.