alt Hacker NewsWe do not know for a fact what they genuinely believe, and many of us have seen companies act in opposition to their stated goals so the burden of proof is on them.
It's healthy to suspect ulterior motives from them.
We do not know for a fact what they genuinely believe, and many of us have seen companies act in opposition to their stated goals so the burden of proof is on them.
It's healthy to suspect ulterior motives from them.
Can you be more specific on what you mean - how would you prove what anyone believes about something short of reading minds and what would proof look like to you?
Here is Dario writing about AI safety in 2016 [1]. Dario and others in the Anthropic circle have long been associated [2] with the effective altruism movement, which whatever you think about them, they are very concerned about AI existential risks. Ronan Farrow & the New Yorker did a mega deep dive on Sam Altmans history of being dishonest and manipulative, and it credibly reports that Anthropic cofounders left due to not trusting leadership there with safety.
On the other hand we have decades long evidence of Altman and co. being dishonest and employing people like Chris Lehane [3]. I have no affiliation with Anthropic beyond being a user of their products to be clear but it feels like HN is going to end up on the wrong side of this one.
[1]. https://arxiv.org/abs/1606.06565 [2]. https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/53Gc35vDLK2u5nBxP/... [3]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Lehane