Tanishq Mathew Abraham agrees but opposes slowing AI research.
As my entire feed is criticizing Anthropic, I think that the team there genuinely believes what they’re saying. It’s not a marketing/anticompetitive tactic. They genuinely believe these models are dangerous and that AI research should be slowed down.
Many users dismissed Anthropic's AI danger claims and pause responses as PR damage control for nerfed models or power grabs, while some praised the company as principled for taking risks seriously.
"Anthropic's lying/hyping" is the lazy cope explanation which doesn't require grappling with the gravity of our current situation
🔔 IF Anthropic is for real about safety, the should pause, for one month, and show leadership.
If they won’t pause, even briefly, we have a different kind of answer about what is real and what is marketing.
Especially after the games they played with Mythos, it is time for them to put up or shut up.
(and correspondingly, dear readers, if you are for real, you should consider reposting this.)
As my entire feed is criticizing Anthropic, I think that the team there genuinely believes what they’re saying. It’s not a marketing/anticompetitive tactic. They genuinely believe these models are dangerous and that AI research should be slowed down.
@finbarrtimbers well, they released a refusal machine
As my entire feed is criticizing Anthropic, I think that the team there genuinely believes what they’re saying. It’s not a marketing/anticompetitive tactic. They genuinely believe these models are dangerous and that AI research should be slowed down.
@finbarrtimbers well, other people's ai research should be slowed down
As my entire feed is criticizing Anthropic, I think that the team there genuinely believes what they’re saying. It’s not a marketing/anticompetitive tactic. They genuinely believe these models are dangerous and that AI research should be slowed down.
To elaborate:
I think their statements about Mythos capabilities/risks are genuine, not hype.
Calling stuff hype is often a way to not grapple with those risks, and detracts from the much more important (and interesting) Q of why they and others often disagree on solutions.
(some people think Anthropic's lying about their motivations but think the tech is real -- I'm not referring to such people here, though I think they're mistaken in a different way)
(some people think Anthropic's lying about their motivations but think the tech is real -- I'm not referring to such people here, though I think they're mistaken in a different way)
"Anthropic's lying/hyping" is the lazy cope explanation which doesn't require grappling with the gravity of our current situation
@banburismus_ I liked your pitch.
if you want to use interpretability to make models better, rather than to secretly make them worse, come to @GoodfireAI
@casper_hansen_ I think they feel the dynamics of the race are such that they have to be in the lead to control it.
@finbarrtimbers If they believed that, they'd be doing the opposite of what they chose.
@finbarrtimbers not super happy about the nerfing, but I do agree. otherwise they probably would not have openly mentioned this in their report.
As my entire feed is criticizing Anthropic, I think that the team there genuinely believes what they’re saying. It’s not a marketing/anticompetitive tactic. They genuinely believe these models are dangerous and that AI research should be slowed down.
@finbarrtimbers So why are they not slowing down internally if they genuinely believe this?
@finbarrtimbers Everybody should go work for them (if they're good 😅) - you should apply!
As my entire feed is criticizing Anthropic, I think that the team there genuinely believes what they’re saying. It’s not a marketing/anticompetitive tactic. They genuinely believe these models are dangerous and that AI research should be slowed down.
@finbarrtimbers Right but you can’t simultaneously believe AI research should slow down while accelerating your own. Thats saying one thing and then doing another
@finbarrtimbers if they did, every other ai lab would see it as a chance to take over anthropic's sota model position on the leaderboards almost directly.
meanwhile there doubling down on models with bigger weights than opus.
thats like the opposite of safety and slowing down.
@Miles_Brundage @cremieuxrecueil Agree
"Anthropic's lying/hyping" is the lazy cope explanation which doesn't require grappling with the gravity of our current situation
@finbarrtimbers They are deranged doomers with deep ties to the Effective Altruism cult.
@finbarrtimbers agreed, but it's an unfortunate mindset to have imo
As my entire feed is criticizing Anthropic, I think that the team there genuinely believes what they’re saying. It’s not a marketing/anticompetitive tactic. They genuinely believe these models are dangerous and that AI research should be slowed down.
@finbarrtimbers There are no beliefs. Only posturing. Their real intentions are to gain as much power as possible through whatever it takes. I think it’s really that simple.
@Miles_Brundage which one address the gravity? or are you giving me a 8 hour homework?
@Miles_Brundage dude i am really interested in understanding what you mean by the first post, i really do. idk how i could make it more clearer
Tanishq Mathew Abraham agrees but opposes slowing AI research.
As my entire feed is criticizing Anthropic, I think that the team there genuinely believes what they’re saying. It’s not a marketing/anticompetitive tactic. They genuinely believe these models are dangerous and that AI research should be slowed down.