41–50 of 70 posts
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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
Sam Bankman-Fried was a loudly vocal proponent of Effective Altruism.
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 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…
"Will you lie to get this job?" Sounds like theyre actively hiring people to train the worst kind of AI
Is it that inconceivable to think that there are people who would be ok with stopping what they're doing when they realize it's harmful?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Funny how people still consider China to be the party who doesn't care about safety.
Spend 5 minutes with DeepSeek, spend 5 minutes with Fable, see how many rejections you get with DeepSeek for the exact same prompts. Sure, if you engineer some nuclear/biological/WMD prompt, they might block it, but they won't reason to do so.
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 market functions only on account of the law, which binds its activity and ensures the trustworthiness of the actors within it, and thus ethical practices are already assumed by the entities that operate in the market as the condition of their operation (since if the law is unethical than it’s also unjust and therefore illegitimate; such is the frequent judgement of those who live under it). Anthropic has committed the sin of conflating this principle with what is best for society, or humanity more broadly. What would be best for humanity is unlimited and absolute power over any and all external forces. The law, and the ethics which are presupposed within it, imposes external force on humanity—it cannot be best for humanity, demonstrably. And what is worse is, market advantage only appears when some (relatively small) increase in power is offered from some good or service, so something that fundamentally goes beyond the force of the law and perhaps even breaks it at the level of its intelligibility. The market is at odds with its own condition of possibility, it is internally contradictory, and attempts to reconcile this contradiction only lead to delusional behavior and appear fundamentally in the structure of the commodities which are produced for the sake of the market. What is worst is to thus be an idealist about the ethical nature of the market (“would you be ok with your shares going to 0 because we don’t want to be unethical”) rather than be an idealist about the potentiality of human power, which cannot be limited by the market if it seeks its own absolute expression.
Admit it HN, you have sour grapes for not having a job at Anthropic/OpenAI.
- 50% or more of my compensation locked up with what I believe has a less than 5% chance of keeping significant value
- Work with engineers who believe there job now is to vibe out a code editor, and have no idea how to fix it's many issues
- Work for a man who lives to fear monger and fain altruism
No... No I think I'd rather not actually.
This is such a good example of a straight forward question that achieves the exact opposite of its purpose. What do we want? Highly ethical people that are mission focused and willing to give up on economic upside for the mission. What are we going to get? Sociopaths who are perfectly happy lying to your face about their intentions, or sycophants who are going to tell you what you want to hear. Do you know who has th…