Anthropic's War on open source AI

I have no inside info on this, but I believe that Anthropic's trouble with the feds really started when they delivered a presentation on EA and Constitutional AI and someone's takeaway was "this is very strange and probably 'woke'"

I've read some of it. It's a cult. The net effect of their recommendations is to mandate a monopoly on AI, which oh so happens to be them and their friends. That's what most cults' ideologies boil down to: reasons to give more power to the cult.

Oh, of course they have good intentions. They want everyone to benefit and everyone will be equal. They'll just be a little more equal than everyone else, of course, and because they are so virtuous they will of course have more power, which they would never misuse... they're too smart and enlightened for that, so they don't need safeguards... they only need safeguards for everyone else because everyone else is obviously less enlightened...

All cults, political movements, religions, and ideologies are always like this. It boils down to more power for the leaders. If it sounds altruistic and enlightened, be extra afraid.

no worse than Reddit

not defending it, just saying, it is the status quo

> Jesus, being logged out on Twitter is a comically bad experience at this point.

Uh, just log in then?

They don't desperately need to be regulated, as such. They need to be regulated in such a way that there is a very expensive and biased certification process, which is conducted by companies that are certified to do the certifying and those companies are shell corporations owned by Anthropic and other big AI.

The actual safety rules, whatever they are, if they are put into law have to be made explicit, and that makes them easy targets to hit. But if what matter is not technical compliance, but paperwork certifying compliance, that's a different story.

I don't think Federal (US) regulation under current conditions is going to get you what you want here in terms of outcomes.

Regulated AI right now is a grift game. Donations for policy changes, and the ability to lock out competitors. Flattery to stay green-lit instead of shut down by random executive orders and policies. Bend the knee to keep shipping.

If anything, we need LESS federal regulation here and more FTC / SEC enforcement but (see above grift comments) that will also not happen in the United States until voters elect somebody that actually respects the law enough to enforce it for something other than their own gain (outside of their need to be elected, of course...)

Right. Steal the world's information and wrap it up as a set of numbers. Convince a bunch of billionaires that those numbers are worth a trillion. Then once you realize it's just another commodity and the competition is real, aim for "too big to fail", cozy up with the gov't and hope for a bailout.

There are some all-timer not X but Ys in this tweet.

"A pair of 3090s, a Mac Studio, a DGX Spark, an on-prem rack, a cluster of rented H100s, or a fleet of consumer GPUs is not just hardware. It is a vote against subscription feudalism."

Personal opinion: We are at a point where we cannot dismiss an argument because it was written using LLM and the longer message contains tropes. Observations of LLM-written content and communicating it is fine, but dismissing the argument seems irresponsible.