Is he worried? Dario is always deeply worried. I read somewhere he is the Woody Allen of AI.
His wife is a known Epstein clout chaser, so this tracks.
On AI regulation and messaging
511–520 of 573 posts
Re: On AI regulation and messaging
#512Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think the idea is that a frontier model "cures cancer" so much as that it accelerates research that humans do, getting us to answers faster. That's a hard idea to dismiss after what's happening in mathematics, and I believe life sciences people take this very seriously, even if message board nerds like us don't.
There is still a big distinction between A) verifiable proof generation (a limited closed set of axioms and a minimal algorithm like Metamath's are enough to verify correct vs incorrect machine intuition, plus feeding back the rejection/acceptance to adjust the machine intuition) B) optimizing an illposed problem (how do we define the inaccessible fitness function) Yes the field of biology or medicine will advance fa…
I'm not making a maximalist argument; we might just be compatible here. But I'm not saying that life sciences will be accelerated solely because mathematics is advanced; I'm saying life sciences will be accelerated because the models make/accelerate discoveries in life sciences. The same mechanism that's enabling mathematics discoveries applies to other sciences, and while I get the sense that some people on this thread think of life science as bench science, an increasing amount of it is computational to begin with.
Re: On AI regulation and messaging
#513> I think it is fundamentally a crisis of trust. I think that ordinary people don’t trust companies, governments, or the tech industry and always suspect that we are cooking up some new way to screw them over. [...] > I don’t think that a glitzy marketing campaign with a positive spin (which some have advocated that Anthropic do) is the way to win back that trust — at this point, saying that AI will cure cancer is mo…
> The thing that will work is actually curing cancer. This is honestly hilarious. Dario must think people are stupid. First, cancer research charities are some of the most well funded on this planet. They all obtain donations on the basis of "together, we will cure cancer" messaging. They all fund the best science they can. Second, the human body is a complicated thing. You can feed your fancy LLM as many textbooks a…
>> The thing that will work is actually curing cancer.
> This is honestly hilarious. Dario must think people are stupid.
I mean, if Claude actually cures cancer, I do think he'll be right.
The only problem is that you need to actually cure cancer.
Re: On AI regulation and messaging
#514I genuinely think Dario is a well intentioned, intelligent dude, but I think him and Anthropic have a huge PR problem and are really out of touch with how they're perceived. Anthropic in particular has developed this almost Orwellian like veil of condescending rhetoric that on the surface suggests they're looking out for you while underneath they're taking actions that suggest they do not trust you, Mr/Mrs Ordinary P…
[dead]
Re: On AI regulation and messaging
#515Earlier quoted context omitted.
The UN estimates it would cost $93 billion a year to end world hunger ( https://news.un.org/en/story/2025/11/1166397 ) So one would expect $14b/year would solve about 14/93 = 15% of world hunger. > The World Food Programme supports over 152 million people annually and delivers life-saving food assistance where needed most. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Food_Programme ) An estimated 757 million people are food…
> "If we spend that extra $93b, we'd be well within the range to actually stop world hunger." Almost all recent famines have been caused (either deliberately or incidentally) by government policies, not lack of money. The UN spending 93 BB may (somewhat) improve the situation, but is unlikely to end food insecurity. Eliminating corrupt leaders (i.e. Kim Jong Un, Vladimir Putin, etc.), and poor regulation (e.g. Bombay…
> Almost all recent famines have been caused (either deliberately or incidentally) by government policies, not lack of money.
Actually, they were caused by lack of food.
> Eliminating corrupt leaders (i.e. Kim Jong Un, Vladimir Putin, etc.)
Yes, which of the 757 million food insecure people is Putin responsible for their food insecurity?
North Korea has about 26mil residents, so if they were all starving that'd be 3.4% of the food insecure people. Gaza has about 2mil, so we can pin a further 0.03% on shitty governments.
Obviously it'd be great if putin, un and netanyahu were gone. They suck for a variety of reasons. But it doesn't change the fact that we could spend money and feed most of the people who are going hungry
Re: On AI regulation and messaging
#516Earlier quoted context omitted.
Third, would it even work? Big Pharma just recently cured obesity, and I’m not sure that’s shifted their reputation very much.
Commercials, in 5 years "If you or a loved one have taken a class of drugs known as GLP-1, you may be entitled to compensation..."
It's more likely they are found to be breakthrough medicines in inflammatory disease, addiction, and general life extension at this point.
Re: On AI regulation and messaging
#517Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "If we spend that extra $93b, we'd be well within the range to actually stop world hunger." Almost all recent famines have been caused (either deliberately or incidentally) by government policies, not lack of money. The UN spending 93 BB may (somewhat) improve the situation, but is unlikely to end food insecurity. Eliminating corrupt leaders (i.e. Kim Jong Un, Vladimir Putin, etc.), and poor regulation (e.g. Bombay…
> Almost all recent famines have been caused (either deliberately or incidentally) by government policies, not lack of money. Actually, they were caused by lack of food. > Eliminating corrupt leaders (i.e. Kim Jong Un, Vladimir Putin, etc.) Yes, which of the 757 million food insecure people is Putin responsible for their food insecurity? North Korea has about 26mil residents, so if they were all starving that'd be 3.…
>"Actually, they were caused by lack of food."
This is a tautology; a lack of food can't be caused by a lack of food, as it is a lack of food.
>"Yes, which of the 757 million food insecure people is Putin responsible for their food insecurity?"
In Putin's case, he has caused the price of food to increase through his war on Ukraine, as the cost of fertilizer makes many agricultural products uneconomical to grow for customers in less-developed nations.
>"But it doesn't change the fact that we could spend money and feed most of the people who are going hungry"
There was food literally rotting away (elsewhere in India) during the 2013 drought in Maharashtra, but it wasn't possible/worth transporting it to the affected region (due to government interference).[1] In places like Bangladesh, recent governments have used famine as a tool for obtaining foreign aid while also exterminating or weakening opposition.[2] During the 1990s North Korean famine, plenty of food was offered to the regime, but it was mostly rejected, and that which was accepted was not widely distributed. [3]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_drought_in_Maharashtra
[2] https://asianews.network/over-a-quarter-of-bangladeshis-suff...
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1990s_North_Korean_famine#Fail...
Re: On AI regulation and messaging
#518> I think it is fundamentally a crisis of trust. I think that ordinary people don’t trust companies, governments, or the tech industry and always suspect that we are cooking up some new way to screw them over. [...] > I don’t think that a glitzy marketing campaign with a positive spin (which some have advocated that Anthropic do) is the way to win back that trust — at this point, saying that AI will cure cancer is mo…
> at this point, saying that AI will cure cancer is more a cliche than it is inspiring, and most people think it is deceptive. The thing that will work is actually curing cancer.
Other than the fact I doubt that will happen, if it did, I think it would just underline the trust issue.
If some independent group cures cancer using Anthropic’s models as critical support, that would be great—but the nature of biology and medicine is that guardrails to prevent misuse will also cripple research.
If someone with an tight special relationship cures cancer with special privileged access to Anthropic’s models cures cancer making significant use of the models, well, the cure for cancer is nice, but people are going to notice that Anthropic has the control over who gets to try, and the power to set terms, which underlines the stakes for the trust issue.
Re: On AI regulation and messaging
#519Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you say so. I’ve been following the development of both groups since almost a decade, I’m pretty confident I understand their concepts and what values they stand for
Please explain an EA position that could possibly suggest that they would deprioritize human lives in order to make AGI more comfortable when, for example, the largest EA philanthropy organization, Coefficient Giving, formerly Open Philanthropy, has given millions to Yudkowksy's MIRI which is currently among the most anti-AGI organizations on the planet? Can you find any explicitly EA organization that is at all alig…
[deleted]
Re: On AI regulation and messaging
#520Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you say so. I’ve been following the development of both groups since almost a decade, I’m pretty confident I understand their concepts and what values they stand for
Please explain an EA position that could possibly suggest that they would deprioritize human lives in order to make AGI more comfortable when, for example, the largest EA philanthropy organization, Coefficient Giving, formerly Open Philanthropy, has given millions to Yudkowksy's MIRI which is currently among the most anti-AGI organizations on the planet? Can you find any explicitly EA organization that is at all alig…
Open Philantrophy was founded by Holden Karnofsky who was Dario Armodei's roommate and is married to his sister Daniela Armodei. He now works for Anthropic, a company that is explicitly building AGI.