I resigned from Anthropic today

Post by keane » Wed, Sep 09, 2026, 8:10 PM UTC

andy99 wrote: post #915

riffraff wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"collect underpants... Profit" comes from south park https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnomes_(South_Park)

Found it really funny to see this attributed to a Slashdot meme

Post by andy99 » Wed, Sep 09, 2026, 8:25 PM UTC

keane wrote: post #941

andy99 wrote: post #915

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Found it really funny to see this attributed to a Slashdot meme

It seems like the "Step 1, Step 2, …, Step 4" format likely predated the 1998 South Park episode, with use on Usenet for omitting dangerous or legally-questionable instructions or otherwise gatekeeping "trade secrets": https://arstechnica.com/civis/threads/where-does-the-step-st... There's also a bit of prior art with the cartoon by Sidney Harris published in American Scientist in 1977 with a step two abridged as "Th…

Post by giardini » Wed, Sep 09, 2026, 8:38 PM UTC

Post by senordevnyc » Wed, Sep 09, 2026, 8:57 PM UTC

ethin wrote: post #920

senordevnyc wrote: post #876

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They literally have never promised anything like that. They have explicitly said repeatedly that they want regulation, oversight, nationalization, a global slowdown, etc. And then I have to read page after page of cynical comments about how that's all just hype and marketing and them wanting regulation to block their competition and blah blah blah. You people would only be happy if they stopped all AI development, bu…

> ... They have explicitly said repeatedly that they want regulation, oversight, nationalization, a global slowdown, etc. And yet they do the exact opposite of all of the above. They do everything to get regulation just to create a moat because one doesn't exist. They preach about wanting a slowdown, nationalization, a complete pause, whatever have you... And yet they aren't slowing down the development voluntarily n…

Post by khafra » Wed, Sep 09, 2026, 9:07 PM UTC

vigilantpuma wrote: post #910

khafra wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I appreciate your ability to separate sharing the belief itself from approval of acting on sincerely-held principle. However, I think the danger is much more plausible than you do. First, and least important, consider that self-replicating, solar-powered factories aren't magic; they're algae. Second, and more important, consider this fully non-magic route to doom: - We continue putting AI in charge of more things - I…

But we CAN survive turning off both the Faber-Bosch process and cargo shipping. Our numbers would be diminished, we would lead poorer, much harder lives. But no one would claim that getting rid of modern fertilizers would be the end of the species. But the claim you’re making is that we won’t be able to stop AI from destroying our species because turning it off will destroy our species?