It's wild that people are so mad at Anthropic for delaying the release of a product for two months because they thought it would be unsafe to do so. Anthropic already had a popular model and a high valuation. They didn't need to do it as a marketing tactic.
Positive users defend Anthropic's two-month product delay as reflecting earnest staff focused on safety, while negative users question the sincerity of the AI safety rationale behind it.
No Digg Deeper questions have been answered for this story yet.
If you've spent any time at all talking to people who work at Anthropic you know they are super earnest to the point of neuroticism. They did it because they thought it was in the public interest.
It's wild that people are so mad at Anthropic for delaying the release of a product for two months because they thought it would be unsafe to do so. Anthropic already had a popular model and a high valuation. They didn't need to do it as a marketing tactic.
@binarybits Here is an argument that AI doomers in general don’t sincerely believe what they say. It was written prior to the latest Anthropic controversy, but to whatever extent it’s persuasive (and readers will differ), it would figure to apply here too. https://smallpotatoes.paulbloom.net/p/do-doomers-believe-what-they-say