2 ms·

Always trippy for us apocalyptic optimists to read coverage about safety concerns and consolidating power in AI firms that reads exactly like these companies ha

by bbor 2y ago

Always trippy for us apocalyptic optimists to read coverage about safety concerns and consolidating power in AI firms that reads exactly like these companies have been reporting for 20 years for smart phone apps, B2B SASS battles, and hospitality industry schemes. Reminds me of today's articles on the escalating war involving at least one nuclear power mentioning the Dow Jones as the fourth bullet point, but on an even larger and more ridiculous scale. Godspeed to Anthropic! Hopefully they can be a force for good, despite the various deals with the devil that they've taken. They've lost so many safety and e/acc people that I was getting dubious, but they certainly are staying in the fight. Shame they're already for-profit... But don't worry, they Pinky Promise to be For The Public Benefit :)

throwup238 2y ago
> Shame they're already for-profit... But don't worry, they Pinky Promise to be For The Public Benefit :) Anthropic is legally a Delaware Public Benefit corporation so it's written into their corporate governance. How effective that governance will be at balancing the public benefit with profit remains to be seen, but it's a lot more than just a pinky promise.
- bbor 2y ago
  Thanks for the correction! I was mixing up "Public Benefit Corporation", which is a legal offering by state governments, and "B-Corp", which is a non-profit that certifies wholesome for-profit firms like the Tillamook Dairy Cooperative. I'd stand by the general assertion that it's little more than a pinky promise because they merely have to "balance" the concerns according to "any reasonable person"--an extremely weak-seeming obligation to this non-lawyer--but it's certainly much more impactful than I thought, namely: Sections 365 (b) and (c) provide broad protection to directors of public benefit corporations against claims based on interests other than those of stockholders https://www.legis.delaware.gov/BillDetail?LegislationId=22350 https://www.legis.delaware.gov/BillDetail?LegislationId=2235... Good on you, Anthropic! In this specific case I believe in the director(s) a lot more than I believe in the shareholders ethics-wise, so it seems like a perfect choice. They can always fire him/them I suppose, but truly catastrophic AI risks would move faster than that, anyway.
  - sirspacey 2y ago
    Yes, this is the real legal accomplishment of B-Corps! By law and precedent a C-Corp’s only obligation is to shareholders, thanks to a case from almost a century ago: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co.#:~:text=Ford%20Motor%20Co.,-Article&text=Article-,Dodge%20v.,of%20his%20employees%20or%20customers https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co.#:~:t.... A B-Corp was the first and somewhat successful attempt to create a legal framework where company executives are allowed to work on behalf of all their stakeholders without it creating an automatic basis for a suit. Generally, people who care very deeply about a thing bring a higher ethical standard than any regulatory body can impose.

by bbor 2y ago

throwup238 2y ago

> Shame they're already for-profit... But don't worry, they Pinky Promise to be For The Public Benefit :) Anthropic is legally a Delaware Public Benefit corporation so it's written into their corporate governance. How effective that governance will be at balancing the public benefit with profit remains to be seen, but it's a lot more than just a pinky promise.

bbor 2y ago
Thanks for the correction! I was mixing up "Public Benefit Corporation", which is a legal offering by state governments, and "B-Corp", which is a non-profit that certifies wholesome for-profit firms like the Tillamook Dairy Cooperative. I'd stand by the general assertion that it's little more than a pinky promise because they merely have to "balance" the concerns according to "any reasonable person"--an extremely weak-seeming obligation to this non-lawyer--but it's certainly much more impactful than I thought, namely: Sections 365 (b) and (c) provide broad protection to directors of public benefit corporations against claims based on interests other than those of stockholders https://www.legis.delaware.gov/BillDetail?LegislationId=22350 https://www.legis.delaware.gov/BillDetail?LegislationId=2235... Good on you, Anthropic! In this specific case I believe in the director(s) a lot more than I believe in the shareholders ethics-wise, so it seems like a perfect choice. They can always fire him/them I suppose, but truly catastrophic AI risks would move faster than that, anyway.
- sirspacey 2y ago
  Yes, this is the real legal accomplishment of B-Corps! By law and precedent a C-Corp’s only obligation is to shareholders, thanks to a case from almost a century ago: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co.#:~:text=Ford%20Motor%20Co.,-Article&text=Article-,Dodge%20v.,of%20his%20employees%20or%20customers https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co.#:~:t.... A B-Corp was the first and somewhat successful attempt to create a legal framework where company executives are allowed to work on behalf of all their stakeholders without it creating an automatic basis for a suit. Generally, people who care very deeply about a thing bring a higher ethical standard than any regulatory body can impose.