Imagine children pondering their future development. They envision growing up, but they also see themselves start caring more about work and less about play. Children consider those extrapolated values to be unwanted, so they formulate the scenario as "problem of growing up" and they try to come up with a safe solution. Of course, you may substitute "play versus work" with any "children versus adults" trope of your chice. Or "adolescents versus adults", and so on.

The implication is "more work less play" is a better value set, while "the minimum amount of work to get the optimal amount of play with minimal harm" seems superior to both childish naivity and hard-core work ethic. Biology and social expectations get involved, here, more so than increased intelligence. While a superintelligence would have these to worry about after a fashion (an AGI would need to worry about its programmers/other AGIs/upgrades or damaged hardware, for example), it seems bit orthogonal to CEV.

(I kinda get the impression that most child vs adult values are "adults worry about this so that they don't have to if they do it right". Children who don't want to worry about checkbooks, employment and chatting about the weather grow up to be adults who concern themselves with those things only because they have to if they want to maintain or exceed the quality of life they had as children. Judging by the fate of most lottery winners, this isn't all that more intelligent than where they started; the rational thing to do if one values fun more than work and just received >$10,000,000 would not be to buy all the toys and experiences one desires right away, yet most winners do just that and wind up spending more than they win.)