The invisible guardrails are a test run for the invisible enshittification. Just wait til they start dialing down ability to better absorb peak demand or simply to have more profitable inference
Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails
381–390 of 489 posts
Re: Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails
#382Why do people think this has anything to do with safety.. This is entirely about poisening competitors data/products.
Re: Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails
#383Earlier 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."
No one is "grateful" for being labelled a security risk. The statement reads more like a Chinese "Ah Q" story than a real response. (Unless they are piping the F1 Mercedes theme song in the announce system at anthropic, in which case maybe you are right)
But they aren't talking about being labeled a security risk. The scope of this paragraph is narrow and refers specifically to the executive order.
Re: Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails
#384Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the reasonable middle ground anthropic is trying to achieve is - let the organizations that make the most important and critical software get a head start on cybersecurity before they inevitably allow everyone else the same access. Other commentors have made good points that these guardrails are counter productive for well intentioned cyber security, because I can't use it to test and harden my own software.
I think it's a big mistake to conflate the cyber (and bio) refusals with the LLM development refusals. I can sympathize with the argument for the cyber refusals - especially as a temporary measure - especially if Mythos is available to those trying to defend against vulnerabilities. The LLM development nerfing (and now refusals) is very different though. Anthropic has even said it isn't just for safety reasons: > Usi…
> especially if Mythos is available to those trying to defend against vulnerabilities.
You’re buying into the hype they’re trying to create here.
Re: Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails
#385Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everyone that isn't a bitter cynic must be a shill.
I’ve noticed that too many HN folks seem to think that cynicism makes them more intelligent. I think it must be some kind of insecurity, about not wanting to be seen as naive or something. It’s pretty sad though, I wonder how some of these people find any peace or joy in their lives.
It's a very common failure mode amongst the chronically online. It's a way for people to feel superior over others - really, they're just depriving themselves of joy and the idea that good things can and do exist in the world.
Re: Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails
#386Earlier quoted context omitted.
> (which depend, by the way, on accelerating the world toward those hypothetical "concerning" scenarios as fast as possible) Yes, this dynamic is exactly the one that anyone who's concerned about AI is concerned about. I don't know why you state this as if it's evidence against the concerns lol. Someone being concerned about the incentives of a situation doesn't de facto make them immune to those incentives, obviousl…
> I don't know why you state this as if it's evidence against the concerns lol. Someone being concerned about the incentives of a situation doesn't de facto make them immune to those incentives, obviously. I think you're reading some subtext into my comment that I didn't intend. Knowing myself, I assume the scare quotes there are just a bit of casual irony re: the insanely high stakes here. The word "concerns" as use…
It's not just America. The main secret is out of the bag. If it wasn't Anthropic, it would be another company/nation state. Sure they could obtain, and with not.money or leverage, complain about data centers at local rallies, or they can be in the game, and hopefully steer it. It's going to happen with or without any one company or country. The secret it out, and it's unstoppable without complete societal breakdown..So either you advocate for the end of civilization, or you hope that you can help steer the emergence of super intelligence into something not wholly terrible.
Personally, I don't see much hope, even if there wasn't such a thing as AI. The power to destroy is always easier than the power to create, and as our power grows, the differential grows, until at some point, containment is no longer possible
Re: Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails
#387Earlier quoted context omitted.
I hate to accuse people of shilling (and HN hates those accusations as well, policy-wise). And there are ways to defend Amodei's point, or at least there would be if he and his friends hadn't been beating the same drum since GPT2. But I tend to agree, just saying it's a "pretty reasonable statement" and leaving it at that is beyond the pale for anyone who doesn't have an undisclosed stake in the argument.
This is like the most milquetoast stance in the AI safety community. It's great the Trump admin did something, no one expected them to, and they should have done more. Very powerful tools released to the public should be regulated for safety. That is "pretty reasonable" to most people (except the tech-libertarian crowd).
Fine, call me a tech-libertarian. I don't think Donald Trump should be involved in regulating AI.
Re: Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails
#388How do you trust these guys? They are quite hell bent on "safety" but this is backfiring in many ways including safety of your code because it may fail successfully if your context contains something they don't like.
Re: Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails
#389Earlier quoted context omitted.
What are you referring to? The cult belief that they are ushering in a machine god or that they strictly care about making as much money as humanely possibly while ignoring the absolutely destructive impacts these companies have had on society? IMO they are using the cult messaging to distract the public so they take out all the oxygen in the room regarding people that care about the immediate impacts (climate exacer…
"Why don't they just not participate in the arms race?!" - guy who's never heard of arms races If they believe they're creating "a machine god" and that it's better it's their machine god than someone else's (which, given the other contenders, I tend to agree with), then all the corollaries you mention are mostly irrelevant. Whether you believe they're creating a machine god is irrelevant. They believe that they are.…
Sometimes governments have to deal with the weapons made by their enemies and that gets them stuck in an arms race.
Companies don't have to do that. If they're getting into actually dangerous territory, they can stop as soon as they want to.
Re: Anthropic apologizes for invisible Claude Fable guardrails
#390This has dampened my opinion on Anthropic quite a bit. It's difficult to take their marketing for AI as an empowering technology seriously when they are quite clear in their new deployments that they do not mean empowering for you , but empowering for them and organizations that are in their (or the US government's, despite Anthropics performative disagreements with the administration) good graces. You are allowed to…
Google has been doing the same thing for longer than Anthropic[0]. To protect their models from distillation attacks, they silently will downgrade the model's performance to essentially poison your training data without your knowledge. A bit different than Anthropic refusing to assist with any AI development at all, but it's in the same vein and seems not widely known. edit: reading the whole series of Google's AI Th…
It's a 2 horse race, and google is not one of them right now.