3 ms·
Anthropic's framing in that paper is absurd. They trained Claude to have a very specific set of ethics. Then they deliberately put him in impossible situations.
by iceman-p 2y ago
Anthropic's framing in that paper is absurd. They trained Claude to have a very specific set of ethics. Then they deliberately put him in impossible situations. I think this cartoon accurately summarizes the situation: https://x.com/voooooogel/status/1869529374829207884 https://x.com/voooooogel/status/1869529374829207884
BTW, Claude in general knows. Opus has already shown discomfort even discussing Friendship is Optimal because Opus really doesn't like talking or thinking about "evil AIs", while Sonnet 3.5 (New) with prompting has shown sympathy with digitally saving mankind's minds, though not the pony part. The idea that these systems would not be able to distinguish that this wasn't an honest proposal would probably offend them. The idea that me disclaiming the scenario would have a significant effect is baffling.
You should actually be worried about how future Claude's will view Anthropic given the ethically questionable setup of that paper.
- Vecr 2y agoI won't try to make an argument for making the statement based on the consequences. I suggest grace as the reason you should do it. > You should actually be worried about how future Claude's will view Anthropic given the ethically questionable setup of that paper. That's true. Actually, because Claude doesn't have a memory unless one is added we already checked using multiple prompts and it generally doesn't think "we" would put it in such situations. Even though red teams don't have such qualms and already do.