Delegation under asymmetric information creates persistent risk that a governor, reviewer, operator, model, or agent will pursue objectives or exercise discretion differently from what its principals intend.

Delegation gives another actor discretion because the principal lacks time, skill, access, or capacity to perform the task directly. When the delegate has different incentives, private information, hidden actions, or interpretive latitude, its behavior can diverge from the principal’s intent even under a formally specified mandate. Divergence need not be malicious: ambiguous goals, proxy metrics, operational constraints, model behavior, and conflicting duties can produce it. The claim identifies persistent risk, not inevitable betrayal, and it does not imply that principals understand the task perfectly or that centralized control is safer. In LivingIP the delegate may be a founder, governor, reviewer, runtime operator, model, or agent. Bounded mandates, least privilege, authoritative configuration readback, audit trails, independent review, appeal, revocation, and outcome checks are responses whose effectiveness must be tested.