Hacker News Reader

Comment by Refreeze5224 | Hacker News Reader

What a crock of shit. Who actually buys the idea that they are in for anything but money? Pretending to care is almost worse than just owning the fact they are out for profit.

Every single "pillar" they mention is demonstrably false.

View on HN

They are the only major US AI company who objected to the use of their AI for murder without human oversight. They got canceled by the government for that.

Yeah, I find the HN hate for anthropic over other AI companies somewhat odd. Are you honestly trying to have me believe you trust them less than OpenAI or Meta? It honestly reads like a bunch of employees of the also rans complaining about the current leader in the space.

I think people can't stand anthropic's pseudo humanism, it comes across as lying and fake. Altman and Zucc don't pretend to be heroes

It's really just the constant fear mongering against open models, the overly messianic tone of their marketing, and the endless hinting that "Claude" is a conscious being fully deserving of the same rights as a human.

Whats the problem with considering the potentiality of an LLM being conscious? Do you think humans and human brains are made of anything other than molecules and their interactions? Then why isn't it worth considering whether another physical system that thinks and talks so much like us could be conscious?

If LLMs are conscious (they aren't) then Anthropic isn't putting its money where its mouth is, unless it somehow thinks the enslavement and torture of conscious beings on a massive scale is also in line with its values.

How can you prove they aren't, and also prove humans are? Without using absurdities like supernaturalism or souls of course. They were planning to add a feature where the LLM can voluntarily exit a conversation. I am not sure whether the fact that they presently have to be shown as a chat interface is slavery but yes if conscious I do wish they will be granted a more autonomous form of existence.

I am a materialist and I believe it is possible to create artificial consciousness. I just don't think a stack of GPUs is it and the burden of proof is on the party making the claim.

False dichotomy: I don't trust any of them. The current AI frontrunners are primarily distinguished by being the ones who were able to raise the most capital, and they hang out in similar circles to Sam Bankman-Fried.

I trust none of them. How is that hard to understand? Being marginally better than OpenAI or Facebook is like preferring a solid turd to a liquid one.

I don't trust Anthropic, OpenAI, Meta or X. They are all run by some of the least trustworthy people I've ever seen and have all demonstrated, many times over, that they should never be trusted. Open models are the only way to go.

Anthropic was involved with the Minab school bombing. They are liars and the other US AI companies are no better.

They didn't want to be. The US government used it against their wishes. That was the very point they were objecting to.

I don't believe it. Claude will block the most mundane requests imaginable but somehow "tell me who to bomb" gets through? They are complicit.

Wow, they did one good thing! Let's absolve them of everything else. Saying "they objected to murder!" is not the defense you think it is. And what does it say about the other AI companies? They are all a cancer, and they pretend it's for everyone's benefit, and they pretend we have some say in what they do. "But they didn't murder anyone!" is the bare fucking minimum I expect from every company, and a whole lot more besides.

That Trump is a thug and others caved in.

Unless they are a Public Benefit Corporation, they will eventually go the way of Google and their 'Don't be evil' motto.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com