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

Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 1001 posts

Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

#481

Post by ChadNauseam »

txrx0000 wrote: post #435
lebovic wrote: post #202

I used to work at Anthropic, and I wrote a comment on a thread earlier this week about the RSP update [1]. It's enheartening to see that leaders at Anthropic are willing to risk losing their seat at the table to be guided by values. Something I don't think is well understood on HN is how driven by ideals many folks at Anthropic are, even if the company is pragmatic about achieving their goals. I have strong signal th…

> I have strong signal that Dario, Jared, and Sam would genuinely burn at the stake before acceding to something that's a) against their values, and b) they think is a net negative in the long term. (Many others, too, they're just well-known.) I very much doubt it judging by their actions, but let's assume that's cognitive dissonance and engage for a minute. What are those values that you're defending? Which one of t…

> - 10 AIs running on 10 machines, each with 10 million GPUs > > OR > > - 10 million AIs running on 10 million machines, each with 10 GPUs

If we dramatically reduced the number of GPUs per AI instance, that would be great. But I think the difference in real life is not as extreme as you're making it. In your telling, the gpus-per-ai is reduced by one million. I'm not sure that (or anything even close to it) is within the realm of possibility for anthropic. The only reason anyone cares about them at all is because they have a frontier AI system. If they stopped, the AI frontier would be a bit farther back, maybe delayed by a few years, but Google and OpenAI would certainly not slow down 1000x, 100x or probably even 10x.

Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

#482

Post by exodust »

nkoren wrote: post #57

This makes me a very happy Claude Max subscriber. Finally, someone of consequence not kissing the ring. I hope this gives others courage to do the same.

I read the statement twice. I can't understand how you landed on "take my money".

Looks like an optics dance to me. I've noticed a lot of simultaneous positions lately, everyone from politicians and protesters, to celebrities and corporations. They make statements both in support of a thing, and against that same thing. Switching up emphasis based on who the audience is in what context. A way to please everyone.

To me the statement reads like Anthropic wants to be at the table, ready to talk and negotiate, to work things out. Don't expect updated bullet-point lists about how things are worked out. Expect the occasional "we are the goodies" statements, however.

Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

#484

Post by nl »

cthalupa wrote: post #188
statuslover9000 wrote: post #124

The Sinophobic culture at Anthropic is worrying. Say what you will about authoritarianism, but China’s non-imperialist foreign policy means their economy is less reliant on a military-industrial complex. All they have to do is continue to pump out exponentially more solar panels and the petrodollar will fall, possibly taking our reserve currency status with it. The U.S. seems more likely to start a hot war in the nam…

Look. I think the Chinese AI companies are doing a lot of good. I'm glad they exist. I'm glad they're relatively advanced. I don't think the entire nation of China is a bunch of villains. I don't think the US, even before the current era, is a bunch of do-gooders. But China has some of the most imperialist policies in the world. They are just as imperialist as Russia or America. Military contracts are still massive b…

I think a lot of the conflict about what imperialist policies means is different framing.

For better or worse, inside this the border in this map China has fairly imperialist policies. Outside it not so much: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Map_of_National_Shame

That's different to the expansionist imperial policies of Spain in the 1500s or Britain in the 1700s. It also affects a very large proportion of the world's population. That Wikipedia page has some good links for further reading about this.

But it's an important point when considering China's place in the world.

Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

#485

Post by angelgonzales »

Bottom line up front it’s probably better to address the root cause of this situation with the general solution — making government drastically smaller and less pervasive in people’s lives and businesses. I remember not too long ago during the last administration very heavy handed unforgivable and traumatizing rhetoric and executive orders that intruded into the bodily autonomy of millions of Americans and threatened millions of American’s jobs. This happened to me and I personally received threats that my livelihood would be taken away from me which were directly a result of the Executive branch. This isn’t a problem where Congress has ceded powers to the Executive branch, it’s a problem that so much power to legislate and tax is in the hands of the government at all! Every election cycle that results in a transfer of power to the other party inevitably results in handwringing and panic but this wouldn’t be the case if citizens voted their powers back and government wasn’t so consequential.

Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

#486

Post by aidis9136264 »

qaid wrote: post #62

I was reading halfway thru and one line struck a nerve with me: > But today, frontier AI systems are simply not reliable enough to power fully autonomous weapons. So not today, but the door is open for this after AI systems have gathered enough "training data"? Then I re-read the previous paragraph and realized it's specifically only criticizing > AI-driven domestic mass surveillance And neither denounces partially a…

Enemies will have AI powered weapons. We need to be at the cutting edge of capability.

Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

#487

Post by Onewildgamer »

qaid wrote: post #62

I was reading halfway thru and one line struck a nerve with me: > But today, frontier AI systems are simply not reliable enough to power fully autonomous weapons. So not today, but the door is open for this after AI systems have gathered enough "training data"? Then I re-read the previous paragraph and realized it's specifically only criticizing > AI-driven domestic mass surveillance And neither denounces partially a…

Fully autonomous weapons are a danger even if we can reliably make it happen with or without AI.

It essentially becomes a computer against human. And such software if and when developed, who's going to stop it from going to the masses? imagine a software virues/malwares that can take a life.

I'm shocked very few are even bothered about this and is really concerning that technology developed for the welfare could become something totally against humans.

Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

#489

Post by pamcake »

mwigdahl wrote: post #77
torben-friis wrote: post #53

As someone who is potentially their client and not domestic , really reassuring that they have no concerns with mass spying peaceful citizens of my particular corner of the world.

Take your pick from the many other choices offered by companies that don't care about mass spying on _anyone_.

Or don't.

Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

#490

Post by themacguffinman »

nmfisher wrote: post #479
lebovic wrote: post #202

I used to work at Anthropic, and I wrote a comment on a thread earlier this week about the RSP update [1]. It's enheartening to see that leaders at Anthropic are willing to risk losing their seat at the table to be guided by values. Something I don't think is well understood on HN is how driven by ideals many folks at Anthropic are, even if the company is pragmatic about achieving their goals. I have strong signal th…

As a complete outsider, I genuinely believe that Dario et al are well-intentioned. But I also believe they are a terrible combination of arrogant and naive - loudly beating the drum that they created an unstoppable superintelligence that could destroy the world, and thinking that they are the only ones who can control it. I mean if you sign a contract with the Department of War, what on Earth did you think was going…

Not this, because this is completely unprecedented? In fact, the Pentagon already signed an Anthropic contract with safe terms 6 months ago, that initial negotiation was when Anthropic would have made a decision to part ways. It was totally absurd for the govt to turn around and threaten to change the deal, just a ridiculous and unprecedented level of incompetence.
Post reply on HN