Well fucking done. Anthropic has just gained the “has bollocks” status. Also now we know what the govt is really up to with AI. G fucking g
Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War
581–590 of 1001 posts
Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War
#582I 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…
Anthropic had the largest IP settlement ($1.5 billion) for stolen material and Amodei repeatedly predicted mass unemployment within 6 months due to AI. Without being bothered about it at all. It is a horrible and ruthless company and hearing a presumably rich ex-employee painting a rosy picture does not change anything.
[deleted]
Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War
#583What is OpenAI's stance on these issues? Are they working with DOW currently?
Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War
#584It sounds to me like anthropic are basically 'all in' except for the caveats. Looking at the 2 examples they provide:
> We support the use of AI for lawful foreign intelligence and counterintelligence missions. But using these systems for mass domestic surveillance is incompatible with democratic values.
Why not do what the US are purported to do, where they spy on the others citizens and then hand over the data? Ie, adopt the legalistic view that "it's not domestic surveillance if the surveillance is done in another country", so just surveil from another data center.
> Even fully autonomous weapons (those that take humans out of the loop entirely and automate selecting and engaging targets) may prove critical for our national defense. But today, frontier AI systems are simply not reliable enough to power fully autonomous weapons. We will not knowingly provide a product that puts America’s warfighters and civilians at risk.
Yes, well that doesn't sound like that strong an objection: fully automated defence could be good but the tech isn't good enough yet, in their opinion.
Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War
#585This 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.
As a European user, I‘m not happy at all. I can’t fail to notice that non-domestic mass surveillance is not excluded here. I won’t cancel my account just yet because Opus is the best at computer use. But as soon as Mistral catches up and works reasonably well, I‘ll switch.
Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War
#586Earlier quoted context omitted.
This last development is much to the honor of Anthropic and Amodei and confirms what you're saying. What I don't get though is, why did the so-called "Department of War" target Anthropic specifically? What about the others, esp. OpenAI? Have they already agreed to cooperate? or already refused? Why aren't they part of this?
I'm a bit underwhelmed tbh. Here is Anthropic's motto: "At Anthropic, we build AI to serve humanity’s long-term well-being." Why does Anthropic even deal with the Department of @#$%ing WAR? And what does Amodei mean by "defeat" in his first paragraph?
DoD and American exceptionalists also believe American foreign policy is in service of humanity’s long term well being
Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War
#587Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Government always has the option to cancel contracts for convenience, they knew what they signed up for or else they were clueless and shouldn’t be playing with DoD
Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War
#588I 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…
They also posted on Instagram saying autonomous killing would hurt Americans. So non American people don’t matter?
Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War
#589I 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…
I'm glad I'm not alone in finding the specific emphasis on drawing the line at domestic surveillance a bit odd. Later they also state they are against "provid[ing] a product that puts America’s warfighters and civilians at risk" (emphasis mine). Either way I'm glad they have lines at all, but it doesn't come across as particularly reassuring for people in places the US targets (wedding hosts and guests for example).
Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War
#590Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anthropic had the largest IP settlement ($1.5 billion) for stolen material and Amodei repeatedly predicted mass unemployment within 6 months due to AI. Without being bothered about it at all. It is a horrible and ruthless company and hearing a presumably rich ex-employee painting a rosy picture does not change anything.
> Amodei repeatedly predicted mass unemployment within 6 months due to AI. Without being bothered about it at all. What do you suppose he should do if that’s what he thinks is going to happen? And how do you know he’s not bothered by it at all?
Most experienced folks would be very careful in predicting or stating something with certainty, they would be cautious about their reputation/credibility and will always add riders on the possibilities.
For good or bad reasons, the mass employment prediction is just marketing which can be called deceitful at the best. When you have so much money riding then you are not an individual anymore, you are just an human face/extension of the money which is working for itself