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

701–710 of 1001 posts

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

#701

Post by amunozo »

Aeolun wrote: post #618
amunozo wrote: post #600

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just see here is nationalism. How can they claim to be in favour of humanity if they're in favour of spying foreign partners, developing weapons, and everything that serves the sacred nation of the United States of America? How fast do Americans dehumanize nations with the excuse of authoritarianism (as if Trump is not authoritarian) and national defence (more like attack). It's amazing that after these obvious jin…

It’s not like other countries do not do this. They’re just not so prone to virtue signaling as in the US.

I've never seen any other democracy use so extensively the kind of duality between the good guys and bad guys, as Americans like to say. There is a total lack of nuance and a very widespread message about how the US is special and best than anything else in the world, so everything is justified to assure its primacy. It's the kind of thing you hear from totalitarian and brainwashed countries.

I know this is not everybody in the US, and I say this as a foreign person that observes things from outside. I agree with the two statements you made, I just think they could be incomplete and that the countries that behave most similarly to the US are not democracies.

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

#702

Post by jpcompartir »

calgoo wrote: post #12
keeeba wrote: post #3

Big respect Total humiliation for Hegseth, sure there will be a backlash

I see it as the opposite, its a lousy excuse of a message trying to get people not to think that they are giving in. Instead they list the horrible uses that they are already helping the government with. Dont worry, we only help murder people in other countries not the US. They also keep calling it the "Department of War" which means that this message is not for "us", its them begging publicly to Hegseth.

"Regardless, these threats do not change our position: we cannot in good conscience accede to their request."

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

#704

Post by amunozo »

whstl wrote: post #700
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…

> Something I don't think is well understood on HN is how driven by ideals many folks at Anthropic are After 20 years of everyone in this industry saying "we want to make the world a better place" and doing the opposite, the problem here is not really related to people's "understanding". And before the default answer kicks in: this is not cynicism. Plenty of folks here on HN and elsewhere legitimately believe that it…

I don't even think both things are contradictory. People that put too much value in their ideals tend to oversee the consequences of such ideals in real life and do wrong without deviating an inch from their ideals.

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

#705

Post by altacc »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #374
jjcm wrote: post #155

This is the strongest statement in the post: > They have threatened to remove us from their systems if we maintain these safeguards; they have also threatened to designate us a “supply chain risk”—a label reserved for US adversaries, never before applied to an American company—and to invoke the Defense Production Act to force the safeguards’ removal. These latter two threats are inherently contradictory: one labels u…

> this is a strong arm by the governemnt to allow any use It’s a flippant move by Hegseth. I doubt anyone at the Pentagon is pushing for this. I doubt Trump is more than cursorily aware. Maybe Miller got in the idiot’s ear, who knows.

Trump/Miller/whomever don't need to be actively involved in every decision. They have defined an approach to strong arm problem solving and weaponisation of the government that anyone that works for them is implicitly allowed to use. The supposed controls that were meant to prevent this have crumbled or aligned.

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

#706

Post by yamal4321 »

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…

seeing the comment: "people who are making the important decisions at Anthropic are well-intentioned, driven by values"

which is left under the article: "Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War"

:)

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

#707

Post by eunos »

davidw wrote: post #70
flumpcakes wrote: post #20

This is such a depressing read. What is becoming of the USA? Let's hope sanity prevails and the next election cycle can bring in some competent non-grievance based leadership.

This isn't a one-election thing. It's going to be a generational effort to fix what these people are breaking more of every day. I hope I live to see it come to some kind of fruition - I recently turned 50.

> generational effort to fix

You imply that there are folks that willing to fix or even recognize that things are broken in the first place

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

#708

Post by Keyframe »

District5524 wrote: post #689
lm28469 wrote: post #610

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Idk man, from the outside anthropic looks a lot like openai with a cute redisgn and Amodei like Altman with a slightly more human face mask, the same media manipulation, the same vague baseless affirmations about "something big is coming and we can't even describe it but trust us we need more money"

They both work in the same market but they have pretty different careers and understandings. I simply can't believe why on Earth would people choose Altman over Amodei to trust in these kind of pretty important questions. This is not about who is the more savvy investor maximizing shareholder value. I personally don't care whose company grows bigger or goes bust first, OpenAI or Anthropic. The real stakes are differe…

Amodei believed Altman, so there's that. I don't (have to) believe either. If product works for me, it works. Raising their clanker products to second coming is for investor relations, of which I am proud to day I am not.

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

#709

Post by u1hcw9nx »

GardenLetter27 wrote: post #703

Anthropic doesn't want us to have the right to run open weight models on our own computers. They were never the good guys.

What I read is: Anything not open source, open weight, is evil.

I disagree. The concept of nuance, putting things in context, is the source of all good in internet discussions.

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

#710

Post by miroljub »

soco wrote: post #685
miroljub wrote: post #678

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While many praise them for sticking to their values, it's also worth mentioning that their values are not everyone's values. Of all major LLMs, Claude is perhaps the most closed and, subjectively, the most biased. Instead of striving for neutrality, Anthropic leadership's main concern is to push their values down people's throats and to ensure consistent bias in all their models. I have a feeling they see themselves…

I might be misreading your comment, which I understood like "Chinese make humanity more resistant to propaganda". It just doesn't add up, can you please explain?

Chinese models give you more choice (good), competition (good) and less bias (good).

I did not say anything about the Chinese government, which is sadly becoming a role model for many (all?) Western governments.

Post reply on HN