Gives me Google dropping "don't be evil" vibes, what could go wrong?
Anthropic drops flagship safety pledge
221–230 of 716 posts
Re: Anthropic drops flagship safety pledge
#222Earlier quoted context omitted.
It turns out the biggest threat to AI safety is capitalism, who would have thought
Nick Land has basically been saying this since the 90s, if you can look past all the rhetoric
Exactly. He recently said the following in an interview:
"AI safety and anti-capitalism [...] are at least strongly analogous, if not exactly the same thing." [0]
[0] Nick Land (2026). A Conversation with Nick Land (Part 2) by Vincent Lê in Architechtonics Substack. Retrieved from vincentl3.substack.com/p/a-conversation-with-nick-land-part-a4f
Re: Anthropic drops flagship safety pledge
#223Many startups that build features which sit on top of Claude/ChatGPT/Codex, etc. And I think:
You are just one new feature announcement from Anthropic/OpenAI away from irrelevance.
Same as it was when people built their busineses on top of AWS a decade ago
Re: Anthropic drops flagship safety pledge
#224Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's because their government is asking for things that shouldn't be asked - again, no regulation, no oversight.
The government is forcing them to change their policy, by definition that is regulation and oversight. Let's say that the government was forcing a company to change their overall right-to-repair or return policy in order to avoid being on a blacklist, would that not be seen as oversight and regulation? Whether the regulation is legitimate or of benefit is a different argument.
I think GP was referred to lack of regulation and oversight over the government.
Re: Anthropic drops flagship safety pledge
#225Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since it is all about money, I just did vote with my wallet and cancelled the Max subscription
If you're a U.S. citizen, tax dollars from you and others will backstop any cancelled subscriptions, I guess good on you for not trying to pay them twice, though you get zero benefit with this approach.
You've succinctly identified and communicated a real problem. In your opinion, what is the best approach, if any, to attempt to address it?
Re: Anthropic drops flagship safety pledge
#226Earlier quoted context omitted.
The government is forcing them to change their policy, by definition that is regulation and oversight. Let's say that the government was forcing a company to change their overall right-to-repair or return policy in order to avoid being on a blacklist, would that not be seen as oversight and regulation? Whether the regulation is legitimate or of benefit is a different argument.
I think GP was referred to lack of regulation and oversight over the government.
Of course, but that is incoherent. Regulation and oversight is government.
Re: Anthropic drops flagship safety pledge
#227Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I hope they're willing to risk losing their seat at the table to be guided by values. that's about as naive as it can be. if they have any values left at all (which I hope they have) them not being at the table with labs which don't have any left is much worse than them being there and having a chance to influence at least with the leftovers. that said, of course money > all else.
This is a common logical fallacy. It's not true that the party A with a few values can influence the party B with no values. It's only ever the case that party B fully drags party A to the no-values side. See also: employees who rationalize staying at companies running unethical or illegal projects.
Employees and employers are not sitting at the same table, this is a category error. We're talking lab to lab. Obviously in a fiercely competitive market like this with serious players not sharing the same set of rules it's close to pointless, but it's still better than letting those other players do their things uncontested.
Re: Anthropic drops flagship safety pledge
#228What's up here? Trump and the right wing government put pressure on and no one is talking about it?
Re: Anthropic drops flagship safety pledge
#229Earlier quoted context omitted.
It turns out the biggest threat to AI safety is capitalism, who would have thought
Certainly not the prior century-and-a-half's worth of books and films.
And I still run into naysayers claiming that we cannot extract valuable opinions or warnings from fiction because "they're fictional". Fiction comes from ideas. Fiction is not meant to model reality but approximate it to make a point either explicitly or implicitly.
Just because they're not 1:1 model of reality or predictions doesn't mean that the ideas they communicate are worthless.
Re: Anthropic drops flagship safety pledge
#230Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> I VERY LARGELY prefer an AI like grok that doesn't pretend and let the onus of interpretation to the user rather than a bunch of anonymous "researchers" that may be equally biased, at the extreme, may tell you that America's founding father were black women Setting aside for a moment that Grok is manipulated and biased to a hilarious extent. ("Elon is world champion at everything, including drinking piss") There is…
You understood the issue so well but still made the mistake you identified, by claiming that "neutral" exists. "Neutral" is a synonym for "bias toward status quo"