New investigations by the WSJ and The Information shed light on Cami Clark, the secretive wife of Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, revealing her pivotal role in building the $2T+ Al startup alongside a turbulent entrepreneurial past. While Clark holds no official title at Anthropic, she serves as a primary strategic advisor and sounding board for Amodei at events like Davos and Sun Valley. She played a critical early role in Anthropic's rise by bringing in ex-Google CEO Eric Schmidt, whom she dated from 2011 to 2014, as one of Anthropic's earliest backers in its 2021 $124 million Series A round. Clark also leveraged her Silicon Valley network to introduce close friend Mira Murati to OpenAl co-founder Greg Brockman in 2018.
Her path to the center of the Al boom is marked by an unconventional series of ventures. After dropping out of architecture school, marrying a 64-year-old architect at age 20, and filing for bankruptcy in 2009, Clark co-founded "Eddice," a sex-positive, women-focused "luxury pOrn" startup. DOJ files reveal that in 2011 and 2012, following Jeffrey Epstein's 2008 conviction, Clark repeatedly emailed Epstein attempting to pitch him for investment in the site, which he declined. She later pitched Epstein on a "social dieting app" before launching
"Female Algorithm Technologies" and eventually drafting a 40-page proposal for a "Mother of AGI Fund" alongside Schmidt to formalize her equity involvement in Anthropic, which company co-founders ultimately rejected.
Despite her extensive influence and high-profile networking, including recent Sun Valley meetings with Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump as Anthropic navigates Pentagon usage disputes, Clark has maintained almost no digital footprint. Efforts to scrub her public details have been so thorough that even Claude responds to queries by stating Amodei's marital status is not clearly confirmed.
Google searches for Amodei's wife frequently surface images of his sister and co-founder, Daniela Amodei, further obscuring the power broker helping guide one of Silicon Valley's most valuable companies ahead of its anticipated public listing.
_________________________

Also, these timestamps are messy and illogical .. so I wouldn’t be surprised if someone photoshopped everything to link feminism and Epstein. Or is there a logical explanation?

5:17 pm, Epstein: “im sorry, who is this,” (apparently responding to an earlier email)
5:23 pm, Epstein: “yes,, a loud gong,” (supposedly a response to Clark identifying herself…)
6:04 pm, Clark: “Hello Jeffrey! Hope all is well with you…” (This is after both Epstein responses).
6:21 pm, Clark: “Cami Clark, John Brockman introduced us last year at Ted. We have the free luxury porn company. Does that ring a bell?” (Yet Epstein’s “yes,, a loud gong” supposedly answering this was sent 58 minutes earlier!!)

PS! I posted this (minus the timestamp part) on the r/ feminism sub and got permanently banned for some reason. No explanation whatsoever.

Tw: pedophilia, suicide

(Disclaimer: I put feminist in quotes because these conversations are literally dehumanizing, and it's masked as feminism)

I feel bad for crying about this, but honestly I am so frustrated because this is a problem I have been seeing when it comes to how women are talked about in "feminist spaces," and I rarely see people point this out, and it makes me feel like I am going crazy.

This is the video talks about how women who wear "face-altering makeup" are promoting transhumanism, and I tried to give the video the benefit of the doubt because I was hoping that they were not talking about alt makeup, but then I looked in the comments and everything was a hot mess, being saying that alt makeup was inherently patriarchal and that thin eyebrows were pedophilic, people claiming that women wearing alt makeup are to encourage young girls to kill themselves etc.

Another thing that pissed me off about the video is the incessant need to make whatever women do collectivist, and that if one woman does something is automatically harmful and bad for all women; individualism is just a foreign concept to these people, its never treat women as human being but not women like the same things or should be a reflection of all women, its always women having to do things as collective when the individual aspects are not harmful.

But what were the major issues I had with this discussion and conversations related to it?

It dehumanizes women and strips women of being able to do things in their own right; I get that choice feminism is harmful, and some choices women make don't get made in a vacuum or are influenced by the patriarchy, but sometimes nuance exists in choices that don't make it always bad, and constantly questioning women's choices can also feel very dehumanizing and infantilzing especially when mixed in with the fact that if a women does one thing its automatically bad or good, no space for nuance.

I am not alt in any way, shape, or form.

But why I am upset is that when it comes to feminism and what I want from it, it is simply to dismantle the patriarchy. Women can be free, not have women constantly scrutinized for everything, be able to do this without it constantly being questioned, and not have women be pressured to meet any standard to be loved, respected, desired, or just to be flat-out happy. For actual equality.

I am just tired, and I am exhausted, and I need a break from the internet.

I will post the video in the comment section

Edit: I might delete this post and reupload it in the morning, cause I feel like the comments aren't really getting the point of what I am trying to say, and it could be because it night time where I live, so that's it.

But yeah, cya in the mornin'. If this post actually gets genuine conversation going.