Anthropic being a good citizen or pushing ideology?
anthropic.com
Anthropic being a good citizen or pushing ideology?
1–8 of 8 posts
Re: Anthropic being a good citizen or pushing ideology?
#2No serious mathematical model that I am aware of has been made as to how LLMs have the potential to grow exponentially in intelligence or has any one show how the application of open source based knowledge (i.e. the training corpus) is a novel "threat" sufficient to require government regulation which conveniently protects incumbents "moats." Instead we got the lesswrong scifi religious treatises. Do we take regulatory advice from scientology too?
Re: Anthropic being a good citizen or pushing ideology?
#3Title: Policy on the AI Exponential
> please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize.
Re: Anthropic being a good citizen or pushing ideology?
#4Title: Policy on the AI Exponential > please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Ok i honestly was not aware opinionated titles were not allowed. sorry about. Why doesnt HN autopopulate the title in that case? Given this is a discusion site I lead with my point of view. Obviously the content behind the link is unchanged. Also I will note the original title is misleading according to some points of view since it implies the "ai exponential" is an established fact rather than an article of faith or a marketing narrative.
Re: Anthropic being a good citizen or pushing ideology?
#5The default assumption when evaluating any statement from Anthropic (or OpenAI, or anyone else) should always be that they are either trying to juice their IPO, create the conditions for regulatory capture, or both.
Re: Anthropic being a good citizen or pushing ideology?
#6No serious mathematical model that I am aware of has been made as to how LLMs have the potential to grow exponentially in intelligence or has any one show how the application of open source based knowledge (i.e. the training corpus) is a novel "threat" sufficient to require government regulation which conveniently protects incumbents "moats." Instead we got the lesswrong scifi religious treatises. Do we take regulato…
The low level foundations of intelligence, both human and machine, are just not well understood in general. It's totally plausible that different architectures could be capable of superintelligence at far fewer parameters than current LLMs. We just don't know.
All we have to go on is the empirical trajectory, and I can see reasonable arguments either way.
Re: Anthropic being a good citizen or pushing ideology?
#7Title: Policy on the AI Exponential > please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Ok i honestly was not aware opinionated titles were not allowed. sorry about. Why doesnt HN autopopulate the title in that case? Given this is a discusion site I lead with my point of view. Obviously the content behind the link is unchanged. Also I will note the original title is misleading according to some points of view since it implies the "ai exponential" is an established fact rather than an article of faith or…
> Why doesnt HN autopopulate the title in that case
Cost of automation; application of intelligence over exceptions.
> Given this is a discusion site I lead with my point of view
Post it in the submission.
Re: Anthropic being a good citizen or pushing ideology?
#8No serious mathematical model that I am aware of has been made as to how LLMs have the potential to grow exponentially in intelligence or has any one show how the application of open source based knowledge (i.e. the training corpus) is a novel "threat" sufficient to require government regulation which conveniently protects incumbents "moats." Instead we got the lesswrong scifi religious treatises. Do we take regulato…
The low level foundations of intelligence, both human and machine, are just not well understood in general. It's totally plausible that different architectures could be capable of superintelligence at far fewer parameters than current LLMs. We just don't know. All we have to go on is the empirical trajectory, and I can see reasonable arguments either way.
this assumes general intelligence as an abstract principle vs an adapation to specific constraints is even a thing. we also dont have a low level understanding of how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.