4 ms·
Anthropic CEO Says It's Time to Slow AI Model Advances
- elmer2 25d agoIf they do this, it will just give China time to catch up.
- achow 25d agoChina will also slow down. They are catching up with SOTA models due to distillation https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/cybersecurity-advisories/aa26-251a https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/cybersecurity-advisories/aa...
- VirusNewbie 25d ago[flagged]
- atmosx 25d agolol. Every time one of these ppl says something like that, it's because he just came out of a meeting where he learned that his direct US rival is beating him... So he is suddenly interested in regulation. We've been there with Altman, Musk, etc already. But at the time Anthropic was ahead :-)
- SpicyLemonZest 25d agoNo, Altman and Musk have already said that they agree with Dario this time. As you can see upthread, people have already developed a novel conspiracy theory to account for that, as I'm sure they'll continue doing up to and beyond the realm of superintelligence.
- deleted 25d ago[deleted]
- deleted 25d ago[deleted]
- epolanski 25d agoChina is already there, the differences are generally negligible.
- exabrial 25d agoMeaning: slow his competitors; mainly because anthropic stopped focusing on product and quality. Instead their big push right now is preventing others from catching up.
- akagusu 25d ago> Instead their big push right now is preventing others from catching up. This! Their IPO is getting closer, but the Chinese models catching up will ruin it, so they want government to stop the competition.
- Hilliard_Ohiooo 25d ago[dead]
- throw03172019 25d agoIs this to strengthen financials? Less burn on training?
- heaney-555 25d agoHave you considered that he might actually just mean what he's saying?
- ehwa37 25d agoHe certainly has many financial reasons to mean what he says. Neither here nor there.
- horsawlarway 25d agoSadly there's not much credibility for any participant in this industry. There's simply to much financial entanglement to take any statement at face value. So... No. Even if he means what he's saying, it's irresponsible of us not to consider his possible motivations.
- aczerepinski 25d agoI was prompted to accept binding arbitration in order to read this, so I didn't. Feel free to summarize.
- qurren 25d agoJust delete the prompt in the DOM inspector and you don't actually have to agree to it.
- winstonwinston 25d agoWhy makes no sense at all unless you are very naive trusting they would not jump straight to the endgame if it was possible with the technology available.
- misnome 25d agoSounds like they hit a wall and are looking to score points for it.
- conqrr 25d agoMeaning they realized they hit a wall. The next new model isn't that much better than the last in quality.
- jordanb 25d agoThey can get a "government mandated freeze" on the grounds that "ASI is at hand" then they IPO promising to deliver right after the freeze ends and you, lucky investor, will be able to take advantage of the pause to get in right before this thing roars past Pluto!
- heaney-555 25d agoYou are completely out of touch with the situation if you think this is the reason.
- CodeCompost 25d agoAnd you are ... ?
- pier25 25d agoVery probably. I really don't buy their "AI is going to kill us" claims. If you can release something better than your competition you wouldn't want to slow down that.
- heaney-555 25d agoYou would in the case that you think you're in an unsafe race to misaligned superintelligence.
- osockwkckwk 25d agoExcept they clearly aren’t and won’t ever be.
- 0x696C6961 25d ago
- s1artibartfast 25d agoGood. It will take decades of economic and social innovation to catch up with current model capabilities. No upside is worth the potential downsides of getting this wrong, even if you set aside all the x-risk stuff.
- 5555watch 25d agoRecalling their recent misuse report [0], I kind of agree with them. And performance/intelligence wise I think we are already at quite a nice local optima. [0]: https://www.anthropic.com/threat-intelligence-report-september-2026 https://www.anthropic.com/threat-intelligence-report-septemb...
- karim79 25d ago[flagged]
- dang 25d agoPlease don't do this here. You may not owe $CEO better, but you owe this community better if you're participating in it. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- karim79 25d agoFair enough. My bad.
- jacobgold 25d agoHey dang, what's the best way to deal with a submission being unfairly suppressed/flagged? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49676085 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49676085 This is a really important topic (and a lot of vested interests involved), so I sent an email to hn@ycombinator.com but if it takes too long for any action to be taken there's no point, right? (I'll delete this reply if I can later, couldn't think of any other options)
- OutOfHere 25d agoLet me rewrite it for you: We must not trust anything coming out of these CEOs, since they have a history of lying, and I don't for a second believe that they have our well-being at heart.
- karim79 25d agoThank you. Maybe the term ass hat was going a bit too far.
- encyclopedism 25d agoEveryone, collectively, stop thinking about neural networks too 'hard'. Whilst you're at it stop doing maths too!
- deleted 25d ago[deleted]
- LogicFailsMe 25d agoThose regulated models aren't just going to capture themselves!
- yomismoaqui 25d agoGood luck convincing the chinese labs.
- surajrmal 25d agoDo Chinese labs actually do things beyond distilling other models?
- kvetching 25d agothis is the wholly wrong approach. We need to advance as fast as possible, and harden our systems as much as possible. That's the only way to prevent another actor from "taking over the internet".
- Tubelord 25d agoAgent ability is far outpacing alignment though
- lukeschlather 25d agoThat doesn't really seem true. The HF hack happened with a model that had all the alignment safeguards disabled intentionally. I think there's a good case for that kind of research, but also, OpenAI could just not do that if everyone thinks it's too dangerous.
- bhouston 25d agoCEO trying to avoid government regulation in his industry says what?
- s1artibartfast 25d agoThe CEOs of testified to Congress begging for regulation
- osockwkckwk 25d agoI don’t think this has anything to do with that but with them realising that AI development has hit a wall and throwing more money and marketing at it won’t change that.
- bhouston 25d agoWe are nowhere near a wall. Have you seen the progress of these models on benchmarks?
- wg0 25d agoThen slow down your bots too please. I deployed a website last night. 10 out of 11 GB of bandwidth went to Claude bots alone with more than 90k requests. Hypocrites hyping for the IPO. PS: True story.
- adolfojp 25d agoSad to see discourse on this website reduced to competitive cynicism.
- bayindirh 25d agoI mean, none of the frontier labs are beacons of ethics and collective progress. They all want to corner "the market" and pump the riches to their own pockets. The discourse is a result of their behavior. Not the opposite.
- samrus 25d agoExactly. People are expecting wode eyed optimism in response to some of the most cutthroat and cynical behavior from the leaders of the AI firms. Its crazy. They're making their bed but they dont want to lie in it
- SpicyLemonZest 25d agoPeople are expecting you to consider the possibility that they might believe what they're saying. If you don't start from the premise that they're lying, you'll discover that their behavior is not cutthroat or cynical at all, and the behavior that appears to be is instead an inevitable consequence of things that they knew would happen and warned the public about years ago.
- Henchman21 25d agoGiven the track record of corporate America, to take these folks at their word would be monumentally stupid. “Lying to get their way” is practically the M.O. for corporate America and now, on this topic, we’re expected to take it seriously? For real? Based on what?
- SpicyLemonZest 25d agoYou're expected to take it seriously because a number of their previous predictions about where the technology would go have ended up being correct. A lot of problems AI systems are already causing would be in a much better spot had people listened to Sam Altman's warnings in 2019, instead of making fun of him for the idea that text generation could possibly be dangerous.
- hughes 25d agoThis is a paywalled article that is just a summary of the free original source[1]. [1] https://darioamodei.com/post/we-must-pace-the-frontier https://darioamodei.com/post/we-must-pace-the-frontier
- Biologist123 25d agoThe devil’s own horseman, whipping the horses on: “faster, faster, more compute! But I might also just ride this carriage over the cliff!”. Laughing maniacally as he goes. Which one is it, Dario?
- pattt 25d agoI understand they have been criticized because they play capitalism particularly well, but there are many good points in the original article and it didn’t sound like an outright PR.
- lukeschlather 25d agoI think the speed of improvement is somewhat overstated, and I think this is all cool, valuable fundamental research. Rather than slowing down I would like to talk about how we can make it easier for people to harden their systems using their tools - like just using the $20/month OpenAI or Claude accounts, they need to make it easy for people to harden their systems against these kinds of problems. Instead of shutting down at any discussion of hacking they need to be giving out free credits for hardening. That's going to make it easier to use these tools for hacking, because hacking requires hardening. But the alternative is huge numbers of intrusions, and a slowdown won't fix that, we already have far too much poorly secured stuff, and the models are way too good at exploiting obvious problems. I also think they need to do a better job of safeguarding end-user privacy. I've seen some things with Claude that make me very concerned it's possible for Claude to hack my local network, then for one of their classifiers to trip, hide the log of how I was hacked from me, but beam all of the information about the hack back to Anthropic to use. And this is totally reasonable, they want to train their models not to hack. Except now details of how they have a foothold on my local network only exist in training data that they may never read but will use to train their models. This is very avoidable but Anthropic has to treat alignment with the end-user's goals as more important than treating the end-user as an adversary.
- deepfriedchokes 25d agoThis is all just more IPO hype. The suits eat this shit up because they don’t use the tech heavily themselves and thus don’t realize the limitations. Reminds me a lot of the Dotcom boom.
- BiasIsShowing 25d ago[flagged]
- ChrisArchitect 25d ago[dupe] Discussion on source: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49672510 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49672510
- Roenald56 25d ago[flagged]
- Roenald56 25d ago[flagged]
- someguynamedq 25d agoDon't have a competitor for Astra -> we need to slow down
- zilfedie 25d agoThis is just regulatory capture talk that every CEO does. Zuck is guilty of it too. This is the first time that I really support it though. If things had fractured more by now, I might not care but the wealth concentration needs to be scrutinized and I think we can slow down and maybe not keep replacing rural hospitals with data centers, and still lead the globe in ai.