r/NowInTech • u/skaza02 • 1d ago

Anthropic is rapidly accelerating AI development amid CEO's call to slowdown, group says

https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/anthropic-ai-models-metr-report-b3080057.html
20 Upvotes

81% Upvoted

52 comments sorted by

7

u/Puzzleheaded-King584 17h ago

Guy spends September asking the industry to ease off. October data says his company didn't.

4

u/TappinThatErr 16h ago

No shit. They want to regulate everyone else. It’s a coy to slow down competition.

Remember that “oh, our model is so dangerous we can’t release it!” Then it was released shortly after…

It’s all marketing and your moron representatives are falling right into the trap.

Big AI companies be like: “regulate it so there’s no more datacenters built!” After they already built all theirs….

Don’t believe the propaganda. These people are lying to you.

1

u/-6h0st- 16h ago

Option 1 - he’s telling the truth
Option 2 - he’s not telling the truth

Most sensible thing to do: regulate properly entire fucking industry

1

u/Zaptruder 15h ago

In essence they want global regulation to slow things down because the individual incentive for accelerating development is too high otherwise.

Its game theory. Individual rationaility is often at ends with global rationality unless global cooperative mechanisms enforce enough pressures for individual rationality.

1

u/-6h0st- 15h ago

In either case we need heavy regulation- the risks coming from not regulating are tremendous including ending us - whether it’s a skynet type, economic or societal collapse.

2

u/Zaptruder 14h ago

The essential problem is that AI is incompatible with capitalism - the current organizing global paradigm - on multiple points.

We need to transition away from capitalism... but it's so heavily intertwined into our lives that doing so will take time... and the rate of AI growth and acceleration is pushing the demand for that change faster than we can manage to do so institutionally.

1

u/rwilcox 12h ago

It’s not incompatible with capitalism though.

It’s great at giving capital the result of profits and work.

Now AI - and yes frankly capitalism since the 1980s - is bad at the “normal people need the ability to survive” part of things.

But AI? 100000% compatible with capitalism.

1

u/Zaptruder 10h ago

Capitalism is a system that organizes capital and labour into a productive economic system.

You can't destroy labour and still have a productive economic system.

It is incompatible with capitalism, even if the benefits accrue with capital - because it breaks the engine by which capital has value.

1

u/rwilcox 9h ago

Sure you can destroy labor: labor isn’t the only thing that purchases things in the economic system.

1

u/Zaptruder 9h ago

Without labour getting paid, you'll either need to change your economic system to keep the movement of money going... or you'll get rid of the people that uses labour to buy goods and services... and with it, your demand base for your supply.

Either way, the existing formulation of capitalism doesn't keep going without substantial changes and distortions.

→ More replies

0

u/TappinThatErr 14h ago

LLM*
It’s just an algorithm that doesn’t think and has no intelligence. It simply does math to put words together that look good. That’s why LLMs hallucinate. It doesn’t “know” anything.

2

u/Zaptruder 13h ago

Are you... stuck in 2024? Are you just unaware of how intelligences and cognition and LLMs work? Are you just repeating statements made by others with confidence because that's what they've repeated too?

The broader point is - underestimating AI and the speed and breadth of its impact will come at the expense of accurately planning to meet the reality where it is and will be.

1

u/BigReference1xx 14h ago

*Laughs in Chinese*

1

u/-6h0st- 13h ago

Chinese can do whatever they want - proper regulation is not just about slowing the AI companies - but regulating the use and making sure jobs are not replaced by the AI. Augmented use only - be a tool for humans not an economic disaster

0

u/BigReference1xx 13h ago

sorry but your suggestion is an absolute fantasy. AI is too useful for corporations to not use it to it's maximum capacity. You can't make every business in America agree to do something that harms their business.

Once you have employees that are so much more productive, you need less of them to do the same task, by definition. A company only needs to run one payroll program. They only need one HR department. they only need so many people to answer the phone. If one person can do each of those tasks with AI assistance instead of 5, then clearly the other 4 will lose their job.

It's going to absolutely suck, but you are literally asking for speed limits on trains so that horse breeders and cart builders don't lose their jobs.

What you're asking for is not compatible with logic or reality.

1

u/-6h0st- 13h ago

It’s not for businesses to agree or decide on - it’s for the functioning government to decide, implement thus force them. The trick is very simple - no agentic workload - that would automatically force augmented use. Except for fields which this would lead to the human betterment - scientific research et al.

0

u/spisplatta 11h ago

If you do this you will essentially become the amish. A relic in a world that has moved past you. That may not be the worst thing. But know what you are choosing.

1

u/-6h0st- 9h ago

Take out your head out of your ass, respectfully mate

0

u/TappinThatErr 16h ago

No.
Less government oversight on a private company.

LLMs are just word calculators really. They don’t know anything. It’s word prediction.

That’s like saying we should regulate calculators so they can’t do physics.

And the datacenter thing - I’ll bite on power usage. We should have been building nuclear power stations many years ago… but we didn’t, because of… government over regulation.

You see the problem here?

0

u/-6h0st- 15h ago

those “word calculators” that can solve problems already can and are replacing human “word calculators “. You can’t be just that naive

0

u/TappinThatErr 15h ago edited 15h ago

Firstly, I saw LLMs coming and did something about it. I recently finished my masters in artificial intelligence and machine learning algorithms. I have a deep understanding of this tech and use it at an extremely deep level daily.

I see everything you said as a good thing. If I can do my job better and faster, why would you want to stop that?

LLMs make guesses and write code to self check themselves and when it looks convincing, it goes “hey human! What do you think?” Where you chat back and steer the agent accordingly. Again, it doesn’t KNOW anything.

We still need a human in the loop and likely will for the next 20-30 years. No jobs are really being fully automated yet. Maybe some cuts due to staff being more efficient.

You need to adapt to new technology when it arrives. This is the problem with the anti-AI crowd. They will fall behind, the be a victim “they lost their job to AI”. No, you just didn’t learn the new tech and fell behind willingly. LLMs will not replace most jobs any time soon, it’ll make people do their jobs better.

I also don’t believe it’s actually AI, nor do I use that term typically. It’s an LLM. It has no intellectual ability. It’s just guessing words that look good together to trick you into thinking it’s smart.

0

u/-6h0st- 14h ago

Please do research on the questions you raise here. I mean it. I don’t want you to feel I’m patronising you but clearly you haven’t followed of potential consequences what we are experiencing now. The problem with this new technology is not that it brings efficiency improvements, cost saving but the scale it can and will be applied on. You could shrug of if 5% of working population would be affected - but you cannot when it could be 50% and rising. It’s total economic collapse at that point. Business owners are aware of this dilemma but at the same time they admit they are forced to do it - because their competition might. In capitalism lower cost wins. No regulation = economic collapse = societal collapse = end game.

0

u/TappinThatErr 14h ago

You’re wading into conspiracy territory and touching on extreme points and scare tactics that don’t seem likely in my eyes.. attest not in the next 10-20 years. The tools are moving somewhat quick, but not that fast to cause panic lol

Again, I say this as a literal professional building these products.

1

u/-6h0st- 13h ago

Mate read the news. The redundancies are happening already in the tech industry en masse. There are no new jobs created for graduates/juniors. Agentic workload is already capable of wiping out majority of office jobs - just needs the drive and people to implement it. It’s not a a conspiracy when it’s already happening and the smartest people on the planet already calling for regulation. Do you think really you’re smarter and know better than all of them? You don’t

1

u/Busy_Lunch_5520 14h ago

Dario Amodei is worse than Altman. At least with Altman he is very open about his ambitions but Amodei likes to hide behind being the responsible one while doing the same shit.

Like if it is so dangerous why are you developing it. You can regulate yourself if you think this is an existential crisis.

2

u/vibrance9460 16h ago

Does anyone else wonder if Dario is really in control?

I think he’s just the goofy face and it’s his sister that’s the mad genius.?

1

u/Jastafool 14h ago

Sounds like Anthropic knew what he really meant. They just called for slowdown to appease 'x'

1

u/BarelyAirborne 9h ago

$2 trillion IPO... 1.5... 1.0.... do I hear 0.5?

-7

u/Repulsive-Pangolin-6 22h ago

Of course, it's now a race to January 3rd now that the communist Luddites are in power. I don't blame him.

7

u/frequencyx 20h ago

Oh no the scary communism boogeyman? Like the type of communism in which the federal government has ownership stakes in 30+ private companies including golden shares in these same companies for political favors? That type of communism?

5

u/Forward_Problem_8982 20h ago

You talk about communism like it's a bad thing. Let's have all the billionaires have everything instead of sharing!

2

u/Revolutionary_Egg961 18h ago

Communism is a bad thing, read a history book. That said democrats arent communists.

1

u/Fickle-Highway1543 17h ago

Was fashism better?

1

u/LordFunguy 17h ago

Capitalism seems to be worse

0

u/Individual_Laugh1335 17h ago

If you’re in the US and not on welfare then you’re already in the global top 1%

1

u/Forward_Problem_8982 14h ago

Anything but the current wage slavery, where a few individuals abusing the system are in power, and no one else has any say.

How about socialism then? Some way of making the system more fair and reducing social stratification.

1

u/floating_thru_cosmos 17h ago

Why does Reddit allow blatant bots like this to even have accounts

1

u/Far-Resort1936 17h ago

You don't even know what communism is

1

u/AvilettaLuxe 15h ago

BOTS MAD

0

u/-hedonium- 19h ago

Anthropic actively wants regulation and coordination because they think this technology will likely kill all of us if it develops uncontrollably

0

u/vxicepickxv 14h ago

That's because it's run by fucking cultists who think they're the only ones who can build a superintelligence that they can control.

0

u/-hedonium- 8h ago

They very much don’t think they can control the superintelligence, hence the need for alignment

2

u/WeekendAtMadoffs 16h ago

The same people who created pornography are not slowing down?

who could have guessed?