Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Anthropic candidates face blunt money question

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 70 posts

Re: Anthropic candidates face blunt money question

#31

Post by 15155 »

conception wrote: post #14
hresvelgr wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wasn't aware this was known information, but had I not, I would have assumed this was some 4D PR manoeuvre.

It’s becoming trendy to hate on Anthropic these days but their AI security record speaks for itself for years. Every AI safety benchmark/paper I’ve seen since sonnet became viable placed them far ahead of all other providers - marketing ploy or not (ala Apple “privacy” focus) the company has always had as part of their DNA thus far.

This paternalistic "safety" "DNA" is ultimately just marketing and a market capture strategy.

1) Propagandize the "dangers" of AI, stage a few incidents, talk up the risks ("it bypassed our most stringent checks! it's so smart!")

2) Build some thin veneer of "safety" and industry "self-policing."

3) Lobby for AI safety "regulation" - which you've conveniently already got an answer to! Be sure to make the regulations expensive, onerous, and impossible for foreign organizations to comply with.

4) Profit.

Re: Anthropic candidates face blunt money question

#32

Post by jefftk »

notnullorvoid wrote: post #30
dgellow wrote: post #4

> One applicant — who spoke to Axios on the condition of anonymity for fear of hurting future job opportunities — recalled being asked how they would feel if the company someday abandoned its AI ambitions for safety reasons, and that decision sent the stock to zero. Is that a scoop? I thought that was a well known thing with Anthropic interview process. They were very transparent about it beforehand from what I remem…

It would be a decent interview question if such a large portion of compensation did not come from equity. Otherwise it's basically the same as asking how someone would feel if all the sudden they lost 50% or more of their wealth. No one feels okay about that, except maybe the delusional few.

Personally I'd trade 50% of my wealth for a significantly large decrease in the chance that AI gets us all killed.

Re: Anthropic candidates face blunt money question

#33

Post by 15155 »

notnullorvoid wrote: post #30
dgellow wrote: post #4

> One applicant — who spoke to Axios on the condition of anonymity for fear of hurting future job opportunities — recalled being asked how they would feel if the company someday abandoned its AI ambitions for safety reasons, and that decision sent the stock to zero. Is that a scoop? I thought that was a well known thing with Anthropic interview process. They were very transparent about it beforehand from what I remem…

It would be a decent interview question if such a large portion of compensation did not come from equity. Otherwise it's basically the same as asking how someone would feel if all the sudden they lost 50% or more of their wealth. No one feels okay about that, except maybe the delusional few.

This reads to me like an "exploitability" metric more than anything.

Re: Anthropic candidates face blunt money question

#34

Post by notnullorvoid »

nisegami wrote: post #28
dgellow wrote: post #4

> One applicant — who spoke to Axios on the condition of anonymity for fear of hurting future job opportunities — recalled being asked how they would feel if the company someday abandoned its AI ambitions for safety reasons, and that decision sent the stock to zero. Is that a scoop? I thought that was a well known thing with Anthropic interview process. They were very transparent about it beforehand from what I remem…

Isn't the obvious response that they should offer a comparable comp package without any sort of stock aspect?

In my experience hype driven companies are very resistant to that even when equity/cash ratio offered is more sane.

Re: Anthropic candidates face blunt money question

#35

Post by 15155 »

jefftk wrote: post #32
notnullorvoid wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be a decent interview question if such a large portion of compensation did not come from equity. Otherwise it's basically the same as asking how someone would feel if all the sudden they lost 50% or more of their wealth. No one feels okay about that, except maybe the delusional few.

Personally I'd trade 50% of my wealth for a significantly large decrease in the chance that AI gets us all killed.

The issue is that Anthropic is just one company and China doesn't care in the slightest - so it's an entirely moot point and almost narcissistic (on Anthropic's part) to believe that they can have any impact whatsoever on this situation.

Re: Anthropic candidates face blunt money question

#36

Post by dgellow »

15155 wrote: post #31
conception wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s becoming trendy to hate on Anthropic these days but their AI security record speaks for itself for years. Every AI safety benchmark/paper I’ve seen since sonnet became viable placed them far ahead of all other providers - marketing ploy or not (ala Apple “privacy” focus) the company has always had as part of their DNA thus far.

This paternalistic "safety" "DNA" is ultimately just marketing and a market capture strategy. 1) Propagandize the "dangers" of AI, stage a few incidents, talk up the risks ("it bypassed our most stringent checks! it's so smart!") 2) Build some thin veneer of "safety" and industry "self-policing." 3) Lobby for AI safety "regulation" - which you've conveniently already got an answer to! Be sure to make the regulations…

I don’t think so, I think Amodei and the early employees do believe what they say. It’s still worth criticizing but I don’t think it’s as simple as „just marketing“. But with the company growing and their insane valuation it’s clear it’s morphing into something else

Re: Anthropic candidates face blunt money question

#37

Post by jefftk »

15155 wrote: post #35
jefftk wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I'd trade 50% of my wealth for a significantly large decrease in the chance that AI gets us all killed.

The issue is that Anthropic is just one company and China doesn't care in the slightest - so it's an entirely moot point and almost narcissistic (on Anthropic's part) to believe that they can have any impact whatsoever on this situation.

This is why I don't expect Anthropic to stop, and so I don't expect the value of the company to go to zero.

But the question is conditional on them deciding to, which (to the extent you trust Anthropic leadership which they're probably also filtering for in interviews) is conditional on believing that a decision that sent their stock to 0 would have a real impact.

Re: Anthropic candidates face blunt money question

#38

Post by 15155 »

philipallstar wrote: post #26
greatgib wrote: post #22

The worst is that I don't believe a single second that Amodei and his crew are not greed motivated in the end. Otherwise his company would be a lot different, more open, more open source, more available to help good cause without benefit. What I see is more the god syndrome of persons that have are in power and have an edge. He can make the conditions so it is important for him to appear as a "divine leader", that is…

Presumably you're also greed motivated, because you don't work without benefit.

The difference is that most people don't make "Look at how altruistic we are! We care™" a key component of their marketing pitch.

Re: Anthropic candidates face blunt money question

#39

Post by dgellow »

15155 wrote: post #35
jefftk wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I'd trade 50% of my wealth for a significantly large decrease in the chance that AI gets us all killed.

The issue is that Anthropic is just one company and China doesn't care in the slightest - so it's an entirely moot point and almost narcissistic (on Anthropic's part) to believe that they can have any impact whatsoever on this situation.

The irony is of course that China is going so fast because of Anthropic, by diluting their models and learning from them. would make for a fantastic Greek tragedy if we weren’t talking about something that impacts the entire world economy and societies

Re: Anthropic candidates face blunt money question

#40

Post by mwigdahl »

Oarch wrote: post #9
dgellow wrote: post #4

> One applicant — who spoke to Axios on the condition of anonymity for fear of hurting future job opportunities — recalled being asked how they would feel if the company someday abandoned its AI ambitions for safety reasons, and that decision sent the stock to zero. Is that a scoop? I thought that was a well known thing with Anthropic interview process. They were very transparent about it beforehand from what I remem…

"anonymity, for fear of hurting future job opportunities" Ah yes, this screams morality. We're in good hands, folks!

Nothing said that this candidate was actually hired by Anthropic, just that he or she applied.
Post reply on HN