6 ms·

We talk about Sam Altman a lot. At this point he has a Hollywood movie in post-production, a book ("The Optimist"), and a seemingly endless stream of profiles.

We talk about Sam Altman a lot. At this point he has a Hollywood movie in post-production, a book ("The Optimist"), and a seemingly endless stream of profiles. It feels intellectually lazy to keep researching the same guy when the industry is moving beyond him. All evidence today suggests Anthropic is passing OpenAI in relative and absolute growth. So where's the critical reporting? The DOD coverage was framed around the Pentagon's decisions, not Anthropic's. And nobody seems interested in examining whether the company that branded itself as the ethical AI lab actually is one. That seems like a story worth writing.

xvector 6mo ago
Normies don't know what an "Anthropic" is. They use ChatGPT. Particularly sharp normies might know that ChatGPT is made by OpenAI, and the sharpest might know that Sam Altman is the CEO. Now, they may have heard the word "Anthropic" due to recent media coverage. But they don't know what it is and don't remember what it makes. The fact that all businesses use "Anthropic" is about as relevant to them as knowing the overseas shipping company for all the shit they buy off Amazon. So articles about OAI will always produce more revenue for the media, because it's related to what normies actually use day to day.
ronanfarrow 6mo ago
For what it’s worth, the story, while focused on OpenAI, is not uncritical of Anthropic. It explores whether there is a wider race to the bottom in terms of safety, and erosion of even some of Anthropic’s commitments.
- intothemild 6mo ago
  I think you might be surprised that more and more Software Engineers are souring on Anthropic (the company) and the decisions the company has made recently. Not the whole drama with the US Government, but them locking down the usage of plans to their own tooling. That really rubbed a lot of people the wrong way, as ultimately one might have a favorite tool, then suddenly they are forced to use another tool.
giwook 6mo ago
There may be a reason why Altman is talked about a lot. This article in particular surfaces real information and new perspectives we've not heard in this level of detail before on some pretty significant topics that will be impacting you, me, and pretty much everyone we know not only today but well into the future. You have a point in that Anthropic deserves some coverage too and that there are interesting perspectives that we've not heard of on that front either. But just because that's true doesn't mean this article isn't very much relevant and needed. Because it is.
- freely0085 6mo ago
  The New Yorker has given plenty of coverage about Anthropic in their past issues earlier this year.
solenoid0937 6mo ago
> whether the company that branded itself as the ethical AI lab actually is one FWIW I have two(!!) close friends working for Anthropic, one for nearly two years and one for about 4 months. Both of them tell me that this is not just marketing, that the company actually is ethical and safety conscious everywhere, and that this was the most surprising part about joining Anthropic for them. They insist the culture is actually genuine which is practically unicorn rarity in corporate America. We have worked for FAANG so I know where they're coming from; this got me to drop my cynicism for once and I plan on interviewing with them soon. Hopefully I can answer this question for myself.
- foolswisdom 6mo ago
  I think cynicism is deserved just from observing Dario's remarks.
- root_axis 6mo ago
  Yeah, every engineer in the bay area has a way of framing the business they work for as a benign force for good... Until they find themselves working somewhere else, then suddenly they have a lot to say about the unacceptable things going on there. From the outside, I find Anthropic's hyperbolic marketing to be an indication that they are basically the same as every other bay area tech startup - more or less nice folks who are primarily concerned with money and status. That's not a condemnation, but I reject all the "do no evil" fanfare as conveniently self serving.
  - JumpCrisscross 6mo ago
    > every engineer in the bay area has a way of framing the business they work for as a benign force for good This isn't remotely true in my experience. The senior folks I know at Meta, for example, pretty much concede they're ersatz drug dealers.
    - bombcar 6mo ago
      It should perhaps be generalized as "employees usually match the general consensus of their peer-group". Before everyone considered Meta to be ersatz drug dealers, they'd report that they feel what everyone feels. Google was "do no evil" until they had to choose between that and making the money. The culture has to be not only professed but tested.
basisword 6mo ago
OP says they’ve been working on this for 18 months. Most of what you’ve said wasn’t the case until much more recently.
Nevermark 6mo ago
We should stop talking about potential problems or perpetrators, when we have talked about them “enough”? That would be irrational. We should give air time to other problems? I think everyone agrees with that. You have managed to distill a surprisingly pure vintage of false dichotomy, from a near Platonic varietal of whataboutism.
- trinsic2 6mo ago
  Fuck that. The whataboutism term is used to much to sideline an marginalize different view points. I really hate this use of it. We are too engaged in being right about everything.
_HMCB_ 6mo ago
[flagged]
deleted 6mo ago
[deleted]
easterncalculus 6mo ago
[flagged]
k1m 6mo ago
After the US launched its attack on Iran, the ethical AI lab's CEO wrote: "Anthropic has much more in common with the Department of War than we have differences." - https://www.anthropic.com/news/where-stand-department-war https://www.anthropic.com/news/where-stand-department-war
- mptest 6mo ago
  "how easy it is, for those of us who play no part in public affairs, to sneer at the compromises required of those who do" - robert harris Not making any value judgements, but I can see how one might value their interpretability research higher than what the ceo says in a time where the corrupt, criminal executive branch is muscling in to everything from what's written on currency, to journalistic sources. I generally blame fascists before i blame those unable or unwilling to resist them. though obviously, ideally, we'd all lock arms and, together through friendship, crush authoritarians and fascists.
  - whattheheckheck 6mo ago
    Seriously blame anyone other than the fucking abuser. These people
  - morpheuskafka 6mo ago
    They are a private company. They have zero obligation to sell anything to any part of the government or military. The only reason they are involved in "public affairs" is because they want to profit from the government. Moreover, long before this DoW controversy, they had plenty of nationalist and anti-China rhetoric in their press releases, more so than the other AI firms.
    - cm2012 6mo ago
      The other explanation besides profit is that they're true believers that democratic militaries should be stronger than the military of dictators around the world, including AI capabilities.

xvector 6mo ago

Normies don't know what an "Anthropic" is. They use ChatGPT. Particularly sharp normies might know that ChatGPT is made by OpenAI, and the sharpest might know that Sam Altman is the CEO. Now, they may have heard the word "Anthropic" due to recent media coverage. But they don't know what it is and don't remember what it makes. The fact that all businesses use "Anthropic" is about as relevant to them as knowing the overseas shipping company for all the shit they buy off Amazon. So articles about OAI will always produce more revenue for the media, because it's related to what normies actually use day to day.

ronanfarrow 6mo ago

For what it’s worth, the story, while focused on OpenAI, is not uncritical of Anthropic. It explores whether there is a wider race to the bottom in terms of safety, and erosion of even some of Anthropic’s commitments.

intothemild 6mo ago
I think you might be surprised that more and more Software Engineers are souring on Anthropic (the company) and the decisions the company has made recently. Not the whole drama with the US Government, but them locking down the usage of plans to their own tooling. That really rubbed a lot of people the wrong way, as ultimately one might have a favorite tool, then suddenly they are forced to use another tool.

giwook 6mo ago

There may be a reason why Altman is talked about a lot. This article in particular surfaces real information and new perspectives we've not heard in this level of detail before on some pretty significant topics that will be impacting you, me, and pretty much everyone we know not only today but well into the future. You have a point in that Anthropic deserves some coverage too and that there are interesting perspectives that we've not heard of on that front either. But just because that's true doesn't mean this article isn't very much relevant and needed. Because it is.

freely0085 6mo ago
The New Yorker has given plenty of coverage about Anthropic in their past issues earlier this year.

solenoid0937 6mo ago

> whether the company that branded itself as the ethical AI lab actually is one FWIW I have two(!!) close friends working for Anthropic, one for nearly two years and one for about 4 months. Both of them tell me that this is not just marketing, that the company actually is ethical and safety conscious everywhere, and that this was the most surprising part about joining Anthropic for them. They insist the culture is actually genuine which is practically unicorn rarity in corporate America. We have worked for FAANG so I know where they're coming from; this got me to drop my cynicism for once and I plan on interviewing with them soon. Hopefully I can answer this question for myself.

foolswisdom 6mo ago
I think cynicism is deserved just from observing Dario's remarks.
root_axis 6mo ago
Yeah, every engineer in the bay area has a way of framing the business they work for as a benign force for good... Until they find themselves working somewhere else, then suddenly they have a lot to say about the unacceptable things going on there. From the outside, I find Anthropic's hyperbolic marketing to be an indication that they are basically the same as every other bay area tech startup - more or less nice folks who are primarily concerned with money and status. That's not a condemnation, but I reject all the "do no evil" fanfare as conveniently self serving.
- JumpCrisscross 6mo ago
  > every engineer in the bay area has a way of framing the business they work for as a benign force for good This isn't remotely true in my experience. The senior folks I know at Meta, for example, pretty much concede they're ersatz drug dealers.
  - bombcar 6mo ago
    It should perhaps be generalized as "employees usually match the general consensus of their peer-group". Before everyone considered Meta to be ersatz drug dealers, they'd report that they feel what everyone feels. Google was "do no evil" until they had to choose between that and making the money. The culture has to be not only professed but tested.

basisword 6mo ago

OP says they’ve been working on this for 18 months. Most of what you’ve said wasn’t the case until much more recently.

Nevermark 6mo ago

We should stop talking about potential problems or perpetrators, when we have talked about them “enough”? That would be irrational. We should give air time to other problems? I think everyone agrees with that. You have managed to distill a surprisingly pure vintage of false dichotomy, from a near Platonic varietal of whataboutism.

trinsic2 6mo ago
Fuck that. The whataboutism term is used to much to sideline an marginalize different view points. I really hate this use of it. We are too engaged in being right about everything.

_HMCB_ 6mo ago

[flagged]

deleted 6mo ago

[deleted]

easterncalculus 6mo ago

[flagged]

k1m 6mo ago

After the US launched its attack on Iran, the ethical AI lab's CEO wrote: "Anthropic has much more in common with the Department of War than we have differences." - https://www.anthropic.com/news/where-stand-department-war https://www.anthropic.com/news/where-stand-department-war

mptest 6mo ago
"how easy it is, for those of us who play no part in public affairs, to sneer at the compromises required of those who do" - robert harris Not making any value judgements, but I can see how one might value their interpretability research higher than what the ceo says in a time where the corrupt, criminal executive branch is muscling in to everything from what's written on currency, to journalistic sources. I generally blame fascists before i blame those unable or unwilling to resist them. though obviously, ideally, we'd all lock arms and, together through friendship, crush authoritarians and fascists.
- whattheheckheck 6mo ago
  Seriously blame anyone other than the fucking abuser. These people
- morpheuskafka 6mo ago
  They are a private company. They have zero obligation to sell anything to any part of the government or military. The only reason they are involved in "public affairs" is because they want to profit from the government. Moreover, long before this DoW controversy, they had plenty of nationalist and anti-China rhetoric in their press releases, more so than the other AI firms.
  - cm2012 6mo ago
    The other explanation besides profit is that they're true believers that democratic militaries should be stronger than the military of dictators around the world, including AI capabilities.