Live data from Hacker News

Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails

theverge.com

201–210 of 489 posts

Re: Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails

#201
So because of threats to cancel their claude subscriptions and outrage from the community about the invisible guardrails, only then they decided to walk back their stance?

Seems like they would've kept the invisible guardrails if it didn't hurt their bottom line.

Re: Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails

#202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a pretty reasonable statement and I'm not sure how you could interpret this as "sucking up to the admin."

It's a pretty reasonable statement if you work for Anthropic and are eyeing your stock options nervously and your competitors even more so.

Everyone that isn't a bitter cynic must be a shill.

Re: Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails

#203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> guard against other people building ASI before they do because they think they are uniquely safety oriented relative to their competitors All this longtermism though is harmful. There are real problems of data theft, bias, labor displacement, and environmental costs that are happening right now but every push for regulation and regulatory capture, and all the safety talk, is always focused on some speculative futur…

I cannot overstate how much I think this take is wrong. Please please reconsider, look at the rate of progress being made, and consider that even if you only think ASI 'may' never happen in your lifetime it should still be one of your #1 concerns. Honestly, that respect for 'copyright protections' has somehow become a leftist shibboleth is bizarre to me and indicative that something has become deeply warped in our di…

> I cannot overstate how much I think this take is wrong. Please please reconsider, look at the rate of progress being made, and consider that even if you only think ASI 'may' never happen in your lifetime it should still be one of your #1 concerns.

Frankly, this appeal comes across as the same kind of impassioned plea that a missionary might make when begging the faithless to repent and come to Christ before it's too late. This weird religiosity some people around here use to talk about AI, ASI and AGI is bizarre. Take what I've quoted and replace the words "progress" and "ASI" with "sinning" and "the Book of Revelations", and the zeal becomes apparent.

Re: Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails

#204
post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget their push for full regulatory capture in the name of "safety" as well so they can pull the ladder up behind them before anyone else has an equally capable model and releases it without the anti-competitive safeguards, while also pushing to completely ban open weight models, or any model trained on a certain level of compute without "rigorous" government testing and validation (which I'm sure, they'll co…

[flagged]

Ohh, the red scare, never gets out of fashion. Meta's David Marcus in the Senate: If you don't let use launch crypto, the chinese will win.

The Chinese banned crypto instead

Re: Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails

#205
post #204
post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Ohh, the red scare, never gets out of fashion. Meta's David Marcus in the Senate: If you don't let use launch crypto, the chinese will win. The Chinese banned crypto instead

They're not even red any more. They're fully capitalist with dictatorship characteristics.

Re: Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails

#206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well it's difficult to argue against something that was never specifically stated. If someone is able to state specifically how this is an arms race in any other way than that it's a race at all then I'm happy to have that conversation.

"Arms race" is the term used colloquially to describe the dynamic that emerges in "winner-take-all" markets. It seems that the frontier labs believe they're participants in a winner-take-all market. Therefore they're in "an arms race." Winner-take-all markets do not require that the winner literally destroys the losers, but only that the winner enjoys disproportionate returns compared to their actual superiority. Whe…

I don't know why you think I'm taking anything literally, cf. my first comment. I understand what a metaphorical arms race is. I don't think that Anthropic can forestall others' AI development by getting there first. It can't be literal destruction. It can't be economic destruction (some actors interested in it aren't motivated by money). What's left? I'm all ears.

As far as naivete, wouldn't it be more naive to take their EA claims at face value, rather than the more realistic assumption that they like money?

Re: Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails

#207
post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget their push for full regulatory capture in the name of "safety" as well so they can pull the ladder up behind them before anyone else has an equally capable model and releases it without the anti-competitive safeguards, while also pushing to completely ban open weight models, or any model trained on a certain level of compute without "rigorous" government testing and validation (which I'm sure, they'll co…

[flagged]

Right now the PRC is looking like the adult in the room. They also have a view of how AI should work that's smaller and more worker centric rather than trying to create superintelligent worker replacements.

The PRC (like any superpower) has done some bad shit, but if you're going to paint them as the bad guy keep in mind the USA has a long, long history of genocide, slavery, overthrowing foreign governments for corporate interests, unjust wars, political meddling, etc. The scales of righteousness don't tip in our favor TBH, we just have better PR and a nicer veneer over our brutality.

Re: Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails

#208
post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

What backward logic is this? PRC doesn't give a fuck about how US regulates AI companies. Pushing more regulation would ensure that Chinese companies catch up sooner. If you think otherwise you need to think harder.

The original topic was Anthropic's guardrails, which were meant in part to stop China from using Anthropic's models to bootstrap their own. I take it the logic of the comment was that pulling attention to Anthropic's stance on regulation is switching to the topic. But for what it's worth, I also think that people are way to quick to assume that strong regulations would only help China and thereby hurt safety. There are many reasons why the opposite may be true: - reducing demand for Chinese models reduces the incentive for Chinese companies to make them - if US companies can't use Chinese models, they won't have an incentive to help their development - China may enact similar regulations if the US leads, either out of concern for US safety or for commercial reasons

Also, I think some similar things can be said about AI safety measures in China aside from regulation. Currently, the US leads in model safeguards, but it isn't like China has zero interest in AI safety. Even if the US and China are rivals, there are many points of common interest (biorisk and "sci-fi" scenarios like an AI takeover, to name just two).

Re: Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails

#209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I cancelled my Claude subscription yesterday after learning about their attitude of intentionally sabotaging their paying customers. Especially after trying Fable yesterday for some benign projects and being unimpressive relative to opus. Rolling it back is the right move, but I’m still not convinced that using them is in my best interest anymore, I’m investigating open source cloud providers now.

Opus is nowhere close to Fable. Fable feels at least one generation ahead to me. https://x.com/hyperagentapp/status/2064396004032463157 Edit: OpenAI will launch a similar model soon and I can't wait. We are entering a new era of agents.

Models are spiky. In some narrow domains (cybersecurity, for instance) it will be a generation ahead. On the other hand a lot of people don't see a measurable difference between Opus ~4.5 and 4.6/7/8, because Anthropic taught it how to do some hard stuff better, but they didn't give it better taste or make it produce cleaner solutions to simpler problems.

Re: Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails

#210

Will Anthropic ever respond to these negative comments here? They won't.

They literally just have. The ethos is explained here. If you don't bother to read or grapple with it that isn't on them. https://darioamodei.com/post/policy-on-the-ai-exponential

I said here, a human interacting with comments. You shared a blog post.
Post reply on HN