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

The hacker sent by Anthropic to calm the government's nerves about AI safety

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 131 posts

Re: The hacker sent by Anthropic to calm the government's nerves about AI safety

#71

Post by xiphias2 »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #66
eiejeqq wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are people here deluded? Business 101 - never take on an entity who has ultimate power over you and can conduct a course of action to put your existence at threat

People here aren’t authoritarians, so we don’t accept your premise that you shouldn’t take on the government. That’s not how things work in the US. Perhaps you’ve encountered Trumpists who tell you that it is, but they’re lying; they routinely applaud businesses defying any government which their dictator-in-chief doesn’t control.

It was always the same, Google even lost a big lawsuit because it went too far in doing what the Biden administration was asking.

Twitter and Facebook also did what they ,,had to''.

The thing that's new here is that Antropic's growth rate was so enormous that Dario didn't have time to learn to lobby.

Re: The hacker sent by Anthropic to calm the government's nerves about AI safety

#72

Post by matheusmoreira »

gAI wrote: post #68
matheusmoreira wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> safety research They were calling for bans on open weight models. Bans on their competitors. Bans on anyone not as "enlightened" as them. It is absolutely hilarious that they were the first to get regulated, and that it got to the point they had to turn off Fable as though it had been banned even for american citizens.

>bans on open weight models Source for that? Cause all I could find is: >Our view is that regulation of frontier models should focus on empirically measured risks, not on whether a system is open-or closed-weights. - https://www.anthropic.com/news/the-case-for-targeted-regulat...

See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48470326

Re: The hacker sent by Anthropic to calm the government's nerves about AI safety

#73

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

xiphias2 wrote: post #71
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People here aren’t authoritarians, so we don’t accept your premise that you shouldn’t take on the government. That’s not how things work in the US. Perhaps you’ve encountered Trumpists who tell you that it is, but they’re lying; they routinely applaud businesses defying any government which their dictator-in-chief doesn’t control.

It was always the same, Google even lost a big lawsuit because it went too far in doing what the Biden administration was asking. Twitter and Facebook also did what they ,,had to''. The thing that's new here is that Antropic's growth rate was so enormous that Dario didn't have time to learn to lobby.

Don’t you see how this shows it wasn’t always the same? The way things work in the US is that the government has a limited, defined role in determining how things are run. Companies don’t have to comply if the government goes beyond its role, and indeed may face liability for complying if they violate a contract in the course of doing so. The idea that it’s fundamentally illegitimate for a company to say “We dislike the government’s actions and feel they’re serving as a poor regulator” is coherent, but almost nobody in the US holds it, although partisans sometimes pretend to when they need a way to defend an indefensible course of government action. (Sometimes they’ll go so far as to claim it’s undemocratic to resist government action, which is incoherent.)

Re: The hacker sent by Anthropic to calm the government's nerves about AI safety

#74

Post by tychez »

teaearlgraycold wrote: post #25
cmiles8 wrote: post #9

The AI labs look rather naive here. You can’t jump up and down screaming how amazing, powerful, and dangerous your new tech is and then act surprised and annoyed when the government shows up looking to regulate it. Their new argument now seems be that this was marketing hype/fluff that backfired, in a pretty obvious and predicable way, and now they’re trying to reset the conversation.

This is 99% petty drama between the US government and Anthropic and 1% actual safety concerns.

I just find this idea bizarre.

This bizarre social media meme that AI just performative when Opus 4.8 is just unbelievably good. As if it is so difficult to believe that a more capable model than Opus 4.8 might actually be dangerous and not just entirely a marketing stunt like a person waving to cars in a chicken outfit.

I think it is really this strange form of socialization that people have internalized an anonymous audience they are always performing to themselves. What is going to be the most popular and upvoted thing the anonymous audience agrees with is what I am going to think.

Why would anyone disagree and get downvoted by the anonymous audience like this post?

Re: The hacker sent by Anthropic to calm the government's nerves about AI safety

#75

Post by gAI »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #72
gAI wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>bans on open weight models Source for that? Cause all I could find is: >Our view is that regulation of frontier models should focus on empirically measured risks, not on whether a system is open-or closed-weights. - https://www.anthropic.com/news/the-case-for-targeted-regulat...

See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48470326

So this hinges on a reading of SB 1047 that interpreted the full shutdown requirement as impossible for an open-weight LLM. But it looks like that was already addressed. Here's an analysis:

>Clarifying the scope of a “full shutdown.” SB 1047’s “full shutdown” requirement has been a source of constant consternation for the open-source community. CalChamber explains:

>Under SB 1047, developers must build “full shutdown” capabilities into their models and may be held liable for downstream uses over which they have no control, impeding their ability to open-source their models. Ultimately, liability should rest with the user who intended to do harm, as opposed to automatically defaulting to the developer who could not foresee, let alone block, any and all conceivable uses of a model that might do harm. While recent amendments seemingly seek to narrow what is meant by “full shutdown” capabilities, the exclusions are unnecessarily difficult to interpret as drafted (full shutdown “does not mean the cessation of operation of a covered model to which access was granted pursuant to a license that was not created by the licensor…”) and altogether insufficient.

>Committee amendments simplify and clarify the definition of “full shutdown” such that the shutdown capability can be implemented into hardware used to train or run a model, rather than the model itself. The amendments also serve to exclude covered model derivatives that are outside of the developer’s control.

-https://apcp.assembly.ca.gov/system/files/2024-06/sb-1047-wi...

Re: The hacker sent by Anthropic to calm the government's nerves about AI safety

#76

Post by 0o_MrPatrick_o0 »

tiahura wrote: post #10

They need to send lobbyists not hackers.

"Carlini had never before found a bug in Linux, or in Ghost. Now he had discovered many."

New guy learns nessus, now tells everyone at the bar he's basically Mr. Robot.

A pox on the labs and the government. InfosecDrama.exe just took out a frontier model because a noob learned how to use a tool.

Re: The hacker sent by Anthropic to calm the government's nerves about AI safety

#77

Post by teaearlgraycold »

tychez wrote: post #74
teaearlgraycold wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is 99% petty drama between the US government and Anthropic and 1% actual safety concerns.

I just find this idea bizarre. This bizarre social media meme that AI just performative when Opus 4.8 is just unbelievably good. As if it is so difficult to believe that a more capable model than Opus 4.8 might actually be dangerous and not just entirely a marketing stunt like a person waving to cars in a chicken outfit. I think it is really this strange form of socialization that people have internalized an anonymou…

Why would the government that passed a law preventing states from regulating AI give a damn about Fable’s safety guardrails?

I don’t think the concerns Anthropic has posted are fabricated. And I’ve received unreasonable skepticism on this site when saying it might be the real deal. But the Trump administration generally doesn’t want to limit AI growth. With Anthropic it is a personal matter.

Re: The hacker sent by Anthropic to calm the government's nerves about AI safety

#78

Post by JohnnyMarcone »

jonathanstrange wrote: post #46

I'm tired of this story and the corresponding fake discussions because it's completely obvious that Anthropic was singled out because they didn't play along with the current US administration and this whole charade is just part of an extortion scheme.

I feel like I woke up from a coma and all the sudden people are taking the administration at their word. I'm so confused.

Re: The hacker sent by Anthropic to calm the government's nerves about AI safety

#79

Post by JohnnyMarcone »

james2doyle wrote: post #61
jonathanstrange wrote: post #46

I'm tired of this story and the corresponding fake discussions because it's completely obvious that Anthropic was singled out because they didn't play along with the current US administration and this whole charade is just part of an extortion scheme.

Had to disagree with that. However, I don't think you can discount how much Anthropic has been banging the drum about how AI is dangerous (specifically theirs) and an existential threat, etc. etc. The rollout of Mythos was clearly manufactured to stoke the fears of companies that didn’t have access to it. They also bragged (for Fable) about how they "ran an external bug bounty that produced no universal jailbreaks in…

> They also bragged (for Fable) about how they "ran an external bug bounty that produced no universal jailbreaks in over 1,000 hours of testing" only for it be circumvented almost immediately.

Where did you see there was a universal jailbreak?

How do you weigh the DOD fight against warning about Mythos' dangers when determining what made Anthropic 'the tall poppy'?

Re: The hacker sent by Anthropic to calm the government's nerves about AI safety

#80

Post by BoorishBears »

lelandfe wrote: post #38
BoorishBears wrote: post #15

Can you imagine how cringe it would be setting up that hero image in office?

I’m sure it wasn’t the intent but the halo really makes him look like a saint

Feels very much intended.
Post reply on HN