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

Claude Corps

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 127 posts

Re: Claude Corps

#81

Post by fakedang »

TZubiri wrote: post #80
pandoro wrote: post #51

Taken verbatim from Anthropic’s Economic Policy Framework ( https://www.anthropic.com/policy-on-the-ai-exponential/epf ): > We are not seeking job displacement. We are working to prevent or minimize it. Some amount of displacement, though we cannot say how much, may be an intrinsic consequence of the technology, and our responsibility is to prepare for it and respond to it. That is what this framework is for. > Whate…

1. creating and marketing products that are explicitly trying to automate, if not entire professions, at least big parts of them For example? Most of the products they build seem to be tools rather than replacements.

I think I'd place less emphasis on the "creating" part and more emphasis on the "marketing" part. If Dario could shut up about how jobs are outdated, that would be nice. His quotes simply give more ammunition to incompetent CEOs trying to cut costs.

It also goes without saying that a certain segment of jobs are simply bullshit jobs that are prone to automation anyways. But without those jobs, you're also cutting off a segment of the population from the economy.

Re: Claude Corps

#82

Post by danishanish »

parodysbird wrote: post #71
binary132 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“We are not seeking virtual torture caused by Roko’s Basilisk. We are working to prevent or minimize virtual torture caused by it. Some amount of virtual torture, though we cannot say how much, may be an intrinsic consequence of the technology, and our responsibility is to prepare for it and respond to it. That is what this framework is for.”

I never know how earnestly to take any Roko's Basilisk mention

It is such a colossal self-report (when meant).

Re: Claude Corps

#83

Post by elvis10ten »

signatoremo wrote: post #68
pandoro wrote: post #51

Taken verbatim from Anthropic’s Economic Policy Framework ( https://www.anthropic.com/policy-on-the-ai-exponential/epf ): > We are not seeking job displacement. We are working to prevent or minimize it. Some amount of displacement, though we cannot say how much, may be an intrinsic consequence of the technology, and our responsibility is to prepare for it and respond to it. That is what this framework is for. > Whate…

Bad takes. > edicting grand policy plans to limit the impact of massive job displacement that their products might cause Your own job, assuming you're in the software industry, is to automate and eliminate people's jobs. How many jobs do you think it has eliminated? Do you feel you are responsible for your products? Is it ethical to do your job without thinking about and discussing its impacts? My take: being also in…

> Your own job, assuming you're in the software industry, is to automate and eliminate people's jobs. How many jobs do you think it has eliminated? Do you feel you are responsible for your products?

This is a common trope from the LLM crowd. Places I have worked for as a software engineer have created more jobs (gig economy) or improved the human condition (edtech in emerging markets) or helped people in refugee camps in Kenya stay connected.

Even in questionable companies, I focus on work that makes sure the technology is accessible to any and everyone. I became a programmer because I thought I could help make the world a better place.

> The hope is that it will be net plus for the society.

Unfortunately, hope is not a strategy.

Re: Claude Corps

#84

Post by palmotea »

roxolotl wrote: post #29
himata4113 wrote: post #3

I had to read this twice to understand what they're actually proposing here. The entire premise behind AI is that it can amplify (and in some cases) replace human workers. The blog seems completely backwards to what they're advertising to the enterprise in sales. -- edit -- After more reading I find this really funny: "Enforcement and regulatory authority with teeth. The government should be able to block or deter th…

This is what always confuses me about the “keep up or get left behind” crowd. Either these tools are gods in boxes and we’re all going to be replaced or they are actually something that you can gain expertise around. If you can gain expertise around them then sure there’s value in keeping up. But those shouting we’ve all gotta keep up are mostly the same claiming they are building god boxes. It genuinely has to be on…

> This is what always confuses me about the “keep up or get left behind” crowd. ... But those shouting we’ve all gotta keep up are mostly the same claiming they are building god boxes. It genuinely has to be one or the other. Something isn’t a god box if you have to learn how to best use it.

I think the answer is the shouters are just telling people what they want to hear (a.k.a. lying), in the service of selling more. To the capitalists, they sell "god boxes" with the promise of one day being able to lay of most if not all those pesky, annoying workers. To the workers, they sell "something that you can gain expertise around" to defuse the intense opposition a job-destroying "got box" would create.

Re: Claude Corps

#86

Post by calgoo »

pandoro wrote: post #55
gwbas1c wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey, think critically about where you are on the internet. You're on a message board run by YCombinator, who's stated goal is to teach people to run startups. Startups are inherently disruptive. When one business disrupts another, people lose their jobs. Companies going out of business, either because of disruption, or because they ran themselves poorly, or other reasons, is part of the normal business cycle. Otherwi…

I see your point, but in this case we are not talking about disruption at the scale of a product category, vertical, or even an entire industry. AI companies are trying to disrupt entire sectors of the economy at the same time: knowledge work/white collar jobs, creative work (design, photo, video, ...), medical professions, etc. They are recognizing themselves in their economic policy framework that the lowest level…

Also, they keep talking about the US like its the only country in the world. They where fine with Claude being used murder and spy as long as it was done to others. And again they are only talking about the US work force. Howany engineers in India will loose their jobs when the ai becomes cheaper? What about other Asian countries with low wage jobs that will be replaced?

Re: Claude Corps

#88

Post by ipdashc »

pandoro wrote: post #51

Taken verbatim from Anthropic’s Economic Policy Framework ( https://www.anthropic.com/policy-on-the-ai-exponential/epf ): > We are not seeking job displacement. We are working to prevent or minimize it. Some amount of displacement, though we cannot say how much, may be an intrinsic consequence of the technology, and our responsibility is to prepare for it and respond to it. That is what this framework is for. > Whate…

So what do you want them to do, then? Because I don't like it either, but they're right about their core tenet, which is that if they don't do it, someone else is going to. Even if we ignore the obvious other player in OpenAI, there's now dozens of labs in a handful of countries, the cat is thoroughly out of the bag.

Is it annoying? Yeah. Is it preachy and hypocritical? Yeah. And I've yet to hear anyone suggest something better.

Re: Claude Corps

#89

Post by JumpCrisscross »

moregrist wrote: post #70
patcon wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't suppose you have experience with how badly small non-profits are fucked by every tech consultancy they ever work with? They are paying for a service at the very top of their budget, and receiving services perceived from the bottom, as almost "pro bono" by the consultancy, via intern labour. They all have PTSD from the status quo. Getting nonprofits into AI that feels even marginally more self-serve, that is a…

> I don't suppose you have experience with how badly small non-profits are fucked by every tech consultancy they ever work with? Definitely with you here. > Getting nonprofits into AI that feels even marginally more self-serve Umm... so your plan to make non-profits less fucked is to give them yet another consultancy, but this one is AI! I am dubious that this results in them feeling less fucked.

> yet another consultancy, but this one is AI

Eh, I bet an intern with AI could build some internal tooling stuff for the non-profit that they use for years. Same as they’ve been using, unedited, that one Excel sheet someone wrote in 1995.

Re: Claude Corps

#90

Post by basisword »

ipdashc wrote: post #88
pandoro wrote: post #51

Taken verbatim from Anthropic’s Economic Policy Framework ( https://www.anthropic.com/policy-on-the-ai-exponential/epf ): > We are not seeking job displacement. We are working to prevent or minimize it. Some amount of displacement, though we cannot say how much, may be an intrinsic consequence of the technology, and our responsibility is to prepare for it and respond to it. That is what this framework is for. > Whate…

So what do you want them to do, then? Because I don't like it either, but they're right about their core tenet, which is that if they don't do it, someone else is going to. Even if we ignore the obvious other player in OpenAI, there's now dozens of labs in a handful of countries, the cat is thoroughly out of the bag. Is it annoying? Yeah. Is it preachy and hypocritical? Yeah. And I've yet to hear anyone suggest somet…

Keeping building models and tools. Sending out missionaries to speed along the process of job displacement is an unnecessary side quest.
Post reply on HN