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

Anthropic AI

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 30 posts

Re: Anthropic AI

#11

Post by chetan_v »

ansk wrote: post #4

I can't find any mention of who currently comprises the core research team. It mentions Dario Amodei as CEO, and their listed prior work suggests some others from OpenAI may be tagging along. However, the success of this group is going to be highly dependent on the caliber of the research team, and I was hoping to see at least a few prominent researchers listed. I believe OpenAI launched with four or five notable res…

Seems you can see some of them on their company linkedin page : https://www.linkedin.com/company/anthropicresearch/about/

Re: Anthropic AI

#12

Post by ansk »

chetan_v wrote: post #11
ansk wrote: post #4

I can't find any mention of who currently comprises the core research team. It mentions Dario Amodei as CEO, and their listed prior work suggests some others from OpenAI may be tagging along. However, the success of this group is going to be highly dependent on the caliber of the research team, and I was hoping to see at least a few prominent researchers listed. I believe OpenAI launched with four or five notable res…

Seems you can see some of them on their company linkedin page : https://www.linkedin.com/company/anthropicresearch/about/

LinkedIn authwall, we meet again. Could someone list the researchers (if there are any, and assuming there are only a few). Frankly, it's not a great sign that the Anthropic site isn't touting the research team itself and LinkedIn sleuthing is even necessary.

Re: Anthropic AI

#13

Post by joe_the_user »

Der_Einzige wrote: post #9
joe_the_user wrote: post #8

Looks like an interesting project. The thing is, I don't think ideal qualities like "reliable, interpretable, and steerable" can really be simply added "on top of" existing deep learning systems and methods. Much is made of GPT-3's ability to sometimes do logic or even arithmetic. But that ability is unreliable and even more spread through the whole giant model. Extracting a particular piece of specifically logical r…

Go check out the entire project of captum for pytorch. I assure you that gradient based explanations can be simply added to existing deep learning systems...

All sorts of explanation scheme can and have be added to existing processes. They just tend to fail to be what an ordinary human would take as an explanation.

Note - I never argued that "extras" (including formal "explanations") can't be added to deep learning system. My point is you absolutely can add some steps at generally high cost. The argument is those sequence of small steps won't get you to the ideal of broad flexibility that the OP landing page outlines.

Re: Anthropic AI

#14

Post by Qworg »

ansk wrote: post #12
chetan_v wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems you can see some of them on their company linkedin page : https://www.linkedin.com/company/anthropicresearch/about/

LinkedIn authwall, we meet again. Could someone list the researchers (if there are any, and assuming there are only a few). Frankly, it's not a great sign that the Anthropic site isn't touting the research team itself and LinkedIn sleuthing is even necessary.

Current list (in LI order):

* Dario Amodei

* Benjamin Mann

* Kamal Ndousse

* Daniela Amodei

* Sam McCandlish

* Tom Henighan

* Catherine Olsson

* Nicholas Joseph

* Andrew Jones

Re: Anthropic AI

#15

Post by ansk »

Qworg wrote: post #14
ansk wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LinkedIn authwall, we meet again. Could someone list the researchers (if there are any, and assuming there are only a few). Frankly, it's not a great sign that the Anthropic site isn't touting the research team itself and LinkedIn sleuthing is even necessary.

Current list (in LI order): * Dario Amodei * Benjamin Mann * Kamal Ndousse * Daniela Amodei * Sam McCandlish * Tom Henighan * Catherine Olsson * Nicholas Joseph * Andrew Jones

Thank you.

Re: Anthropic AI

#17

Post by andreyk »

Excited for this! While OpenAI has generated plenty of overhyped results (imo as an AI researcher), their focus on large scale empirical research is pretty different from most of the field and had yielded some great discoveries. And with this being started by many of the safety and policy people from OpenAI, I am pretty optimistic for it.

Re: Anthropic AI

#18

Post by Animats »

Their paper "Concrete problems in AI safety"[1] is interesting. Could be more concrete. They're run into the "common sense" problem, which I sometimes define, for robots, as "getting through the next 30 seconds without screwing up". They're trying to address it by playing with the weighting in goal functions for machine learning.

They write "Yet intuitively it seems like it should often be possible to predict which actions are dangerous and explore in a way that avoids them, even when we don’t have that much information about the environment." For humans, yes. None of the tweaks on machine learning they suggest do that, though. If your constraints are in the objective function, the objective function needs to contain the model of "don't do that". Which means you've just moved the common sense problem to the objective function.

Important problem to work on, even though nobody has made much progress on it in decades.

[1] https://arxiv.org/pdf/1606.06565.pdf

Re: Anthropic AI

#19

Post by m4t3june »

n1g3Jude wrote: post #6

Complete waste of money.... Better to burn cash directly cause that at least generates heat... This will generate nothing

That's not true, they might generate some heat with the GPU training

Re: Anthropic AI

#20

Post by joe_the_user »

Animats wrote: post #18

Their paper "Concrete problems in AI safety"[1] is interesting. Could be more concrete. They're run into the "common sense" problem, which I sometimes define, for robots, as "getting through the next 30 seconds without screwing up". They're trying to address it by playing with the weighting in goal functions for machine learning. They write "Yet intuitively it seems like it should often be possible to predict which a…

So they're on safety, explainability, steerability and so-forth. It seems like you could call these "holistic" properties and they have always been hard to add to add to a system - indeed, it seems like in a conventionally constructed system they tend to have to be engineered-in from the start.

The success of deep learning might be something of a curse - it's go enough success that creating a safe system seems to automatically be modifying a neural net to be safe despite it not having the "engineered from the start" quality.

Post reply on HN