← Back to context

Comment by chasil

9 hours ago

Consider this quote from the main article...

"When you further combine this realization with the company’s pronouncements about AI’s ability to conduct all economic activity, you realize that Anthropic’s leadership effectively wants to have power over everything and everyone."

This is fearful stuff on all sides, and none of the people involved might realistically be able to navigate the danger.

the whole thing playing out as expected. if you think about it, the only question is the timeline.

the next model with a gap to mythos as mythos is to opus will be controlled technology from the get-go. the one after it may be top secret.

  • Open models will catch up eventually, TOTL models will get distilled into smaller, more efficient versions, it’s not something you can moat indefinitely

  • Or OpenAI will pay Trump's regime's bribe and they'll suddenly realise that it does not need controlling and they're free to sell it?

That part just sounds like hyperbole at best, conspiracy at worst.

By that logic, anybody who values safety has a god complex? It’s absurd…

  • I am just quoting the parent article.

    "What this degradation represented was both the capability and willingness of Anthropic to silently alter its models to achieve its policy preferences. In other words, Anthropic willfully validated some of its critics’ worst fears in terms of being a supply chain risk."

    • Again, hyperbole and assumption of evil intent because… they take precautions? Nice prose doesn’t dispense you from forming a sound hypothesis

      1 reply →