61–70 of 716 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Once they are a dominant market leader they will go back to asking the government to regulate based on policy suggestions from non-profits they also fund.
Is this sarcasm?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Plenty of people have said plenty. The problem isn’t the warnings, it’s that people are too stupid and greedy to think about the long term impacts.
Maybe it's how blunt this comment is that gets it downvoted, but I don't disagree.
I don’t blame anthropic here. The government literally threatened their existence publicly. They either agreed or their business would be nationalized.
I don’t blame anthropic here. The government literally threatened their existence publicly. They either agreed or their business would be nationalized.
Lotta just following orders going around in the US right now.
This should concern you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This article has nothing to do with the current tête-à-tête with the Pentagon. The article yes, but we cannot be sure about its topic. We definitely cannot claim that they are unrelated. We don't know. It's possible that the two things have nothing to do with each other. It's also possible that they wanted to prevent worse requests and this was a preventive measure.
This is something they've been working on "in recent months". The Pentagon thing was today . This cannot have been caused by that, unless they've also invented time travel.
And I suspect that was not the first time the topic was discussed.
Ah, the classic AI startup lifecycle: We must build a moat to save humanity from AI. Please regulate our open-source competitors for safety. Actually, safety doesn't scale well for our Q3 revenue targets.
‘While there’s value in safety, we value the Pentagon’s dollars more’
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There isnt going to be a HAL or Terminator style situation ... I don't believe for a second we'll have an evil AI. However I do believe it's very likely we may rely on AI slop so much that we'll have countless outages with "nobody knowing how to turn the mediocrity off". The risk ain't "super-intelligent evil AI": the risk is idiots putting even more idiotic things in charge. And I'm no luddite: I use models daily.
Didn't you read the news about the 'claw that blackmailed an open source maintainer last week? It was autonomous, but it could be turned off. How hard is it to extrapolate from that to an agent that worms its way out of its sandbox?