staticman2

> "Anthropic isn’t sure their models are sentient. "

Is there any reason to believe employees of Anthropic share the same opinions on this matter?

Amodei is so committed to A.I. safety that it must have been some other company that announced 24,000 fraudulent accounts distilled his model. I'm sure he runs a tight ship.

He's so safety focused that their models are behind those reckless unsafe OpenAI developers, right?

Has anyone ever said AI safety is a conspiracy by labs to get regulatory captiure but also said there are zero useful idiots employed by these labs?

It occurred to me that Anthropic is going to continue to say things on A.I. sentience while conveniently always concluding the "solution" to A.I. suffering is always something which never has a huge impact on Anthropic's bottom line.

If you mean banning punching a vending machine and stating the reason for the ban is the vending machine is alive and suffering, then yes.

No Sam just does whatever ChatGPT 4 tells him to do. It was too dangerous to release but those fools did it anyway.

There's no deception it's very straightforward per this 2023 post:

"I mean, what if most of this is just ChatGPT [4 era] running the company..."

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35281863

> continue to support an open and transparent culture of dialogue between safety researchers and the rest of the safety ecosystem.

How is this possible when the company's long term prospects rely on on the hope that competitors don't know how the models are made and, therefore, won't be able to create competing versions?

OpenAI and Anthropic are not profitable corporations and they would save a fortune in research and development expenses by "slowing the frontier".

I made a statement about whether Anthropic was profitable I don't understand your reply.

Assuming you meant to reply to me and not someone else are you saying under GAAP accounting standards Anthropic is a profitable business because under GAAP accounting their only expense is electricity?

(I see what happened you skimmed the conversation and didn't follow what was being discussed.)

A recent YouTube video by Patrick Boyle said the same thing. They are only profitable if you ignore all the costs that make them unprofitable such as paying employees and developing A models.

Since the Chinese companies publish their research it would have been odd if Mistral didn't start catching up.

I don't trust Anthropic management to be "aligned" with their users so I certainly don't trust them to be asking in good faith.

Is it refuted that it wasn't sufficently part of the training data or did LLM manufacturers create more training data to answer questions like that correctly?

If he's as dumb as you say I wonder why you didn't provide his full quote in context so he could be hung by his own words?

I don't buy your claim that anyone is using Facebook because someone told them not to.

I'm not the person you asked but I just made a backup of my Raspberry Pi running Hermes and Matrix, but when I tested said backup it refreshed my Matrix encryption key so now I can't access my non backup micro SD install from my phone because I can't decrypt the Matrix messages.

In hindsight I should have simply rotated SD cards instead of treating one as the authoritative ones.

I agree Hermes usually works without maintenance more or less but I don't really trust these agents much and haven't found a great use for it.

Given you've linked to a paywalled article from May 5 2025 that predates the relevant ruling from September 2025 it seems you've mainly been spreading your own ideas:

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/economy/judge-orders-search...

Is "implies strongly reduced funding" your personal analysis/ opinion or is there some article or other source for this?

> you need to run each image through multiple models and then combine the outputs into a final "merge these" prompt.

I haven't tested this recently but my possibly dated experience is frontier LLMs can't figure out which model is correct or incorrect if there's disagreement on vision recognition.

Have you found otherwise?

(Edit: I see you gave an anecdote about merging terrible results. My experience is with merging overall accurate results).

After research and development costs and employee salaries I don't believe Anthropic is profitable.

What a shitty article it suggests something is wrong with Gemini 4 but then suggests otherwise adding:

"A Google employee familiar with model development said there is "large consensus" internally at the company that Gemini 4 is at the frontier."

So this is as informative and specific as an article with completely imaginary sources would be.

The web version of Gemini is awful at search but I don't think that's the models fault.

You can enter law school with an undergraduate degree in English. It's not clear that most people on that career path would have become engineers in any culture.

This has nothing to do with me personally. How much did they spend on the new models and how much better are they? Was it worth the investment?

What did they promise their investors who invested billions?

I'm confused why Chinese access to Anthropic A.I. would need to involve stolen accounts.

Couldn't I simply give a Chinese friend my key on Open router?

Why would the expected performance be relative to other models?

Polymarket thinks Gemini 4 comes out before October 31.

I'm gonna be straight with you—I don't have the evidence to say whether or not it's load bearing.

If you hit the $20 codex 5 hour limit wouldn't that be a good situation to switch to a Chinese model for a bit?

Actuallllly these hypothetical people from a few hundred years ago hypothetically said you are an awful person for misrepresenting them, stop putting words in their mouth, thank you!