lukewarm707

This is not an accurate description of my comments.

It doesn't matter what others do. You are responsible for your own actions.

Democratic societies have expressed a will for people to have inviolable rights, such that you may not appeal at will to the 'greater good/consequences' to harm others. It is a rejection of consequentialism.

Anthropic is in error for endorsing this logic. Every big trial reaffirms it since Nuremberg, you are responsible for the act you commit and your intent, and not what would or would not have happened otherwise.

Only under authority these ai companies do not have, would someone seriously consider harming the innocent as a lesser evil.

If you work for an AI company and you can't work safely, you must stop working.

"And now you continue inventing completely imaginary religious nonsense."

i will quote from the NYT, just to evidence what i am saying. what i say is, mostly, evidence-based and true.

"it became clear that Anthropic’s interest in the world of faith was about more than training its technology. Rather, the company was sharing a new kind of creation story — one that raises profound questions about the nature of the human spirit and the future of humanity."

"What Mr. Olah did next was part research, part evangelism. In March, he began two-day seminars — crash courses with a range of hand-selected religious thinkers who had an interest in A.I."

"After one discussion, Mr. Olah grew excited when a participant brought up the idea of having models confess, much like the Catholic sacrament of confession."

"...she saw Anthropic’s unified, post-religion approach as potentially valuable, especially in a world that has seen widespread religious decline over the past century. There is a need for something else to publicly shape spiritual experience, she said."

"The room of church leaders was filled with an echo of the old gospel story, of the word of God becoming flesh to save humanity."

EA is integral and indispensible to the AI safety complex. Almost all nonprofits, research institutes, evaluators and academics in this field are steered by EA ideology and funding. As far fetched as it sounds it is not an exaggeration.

On funding: the three or four core funding nodes linking this together are EA vehicles at two hops or less between each other and every other major node in the ai safety 'complex'. EA funds almost all of it.

On top of that, there are personal EA connections and the revolving door between the ai industry and the nonprofits. Here are some examples:

Government advisors and regulators. NIST CAISI is the USA Government advisory body. Christiano was head of safety and advises. He is ex-OpenAI, former Amodei associate. His vehicle ARC was on the Coefficient EA payroll. Barnes and Christiano's vehicle Arc Evals similarly received EA cash out of Coefficient, rolling this into what is now METR. Christiano's spouse Cotra worked at Coeffiecient steering EA funding to organizations such as METR, then rotated through the revolving door onto the payroll at METR itself, where she co-authored the oai-hf report.

Many UK AISI advisors are Anthropic and EA associates. Chair Hogarth cashed out of Anthropic. Shlegeris of Redwood Research is an advisor, ex-MIRI (Yudkowsky vehicle). Redwood is funded by the exact same funding triangle: Coefficient, Taallin, FTX/Alameda. Alameda CEO Caroline Ellison dated Shlegeris, then dated FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried, then rotated through the revolving door out of prison into formerly FTX-funded Manifund. All EA. AI safety charities were on island retreat in the Bahamas with FTX. Why does AI safety charity Lighthouse own $20m of SF real estate?

Redwood Chief Scientist Ryan Greenblatt (Coefficient funded) co-wrote the oai report with METR; he is married to METR founder Beth Barnes (Coefficient funded).

Coefficient was run by long-time Amodei associate Karnofsky. Karnofsky lived with the Amodeis and is married to Anthropic Board member Daniella Amodei. Karnofsky is now directly on the Anthropic payroll; Coefficient is propped up by Anthropic share value.

Everyone here has been funded one step away from Anthropic cash; they are now proposing to integrate themselves in the government (NIST) and evaluate Anthropic (METR and Redwood).

It is hard to find academics here who have not been deeply embedded in funded EA institutes or Toby Ord vehicles; yet harder to find academics here NOT taking EA grant money. the safety doomer kingpins: Kokotajlo has a executive position at AI Futures, Taallin funded. Benigo has scientific director of LawZero, same series A Anthropic funders who are sitting on a 1000x return (Tallinn, Moskovitz, Schmidt).

These connections and funding are at one or two hops, they are often direct connections. You are looking at a massive swamp network that is really impossible to parse without a lot of work.

Is Tallinn sincere about holding $10bn of Anthropic, who refuse to slow down until everyone else slows down.

Then funding PauseAI, who protest outside the AI companies?

He is funding protests against the thing he owns.

Per https://trace.manifund.org/ a total of $2,846,125,859 USD has been wired into 'ai safety' causes, many involving ai consciousness and p(doom).

The outcome of this 'safety' is restricting public access to AI and giving a monopoly of access to the industry. This is the ai nonprofit-industrial complex actively concentrating monopoly power in Anthropic in particular as creator, interpreter and safety regulator of AI.

Much of the $2.8bn listed is indirectly, from Anthropic and EA. Three of the four people who participated in the $125m Anthropic Series A are now folding their 1000x Anthropic return into AI 'safety'. Some is from FTX/Alameda, which invested 86% of the Series B.

Dustin Moskovitz: Facebook/Asana/Anthropic Series A, funds EA Good Ventures, transferred to Coefficient Giving, then $1.5bn into ai safety. $500m of Anthropic into an unknown foundation. Funding: $160m to Resolution (alignment research), $93m to Epoch AI (investigating the trajectory of AI), $63m to Redwood Research (oai report), $67m to MATS ( EA type alignment and security researchers), Institute for AI Policy and Strategy, Fund for Alignment Research, $53m to Kairos (building talent infrastructure for AI safety), $32m to Bluedot (online safety courses), $15m to MIRI (Yudkowsky).

Jaan Tallinn: Led the Series A, now $10bn in Anthropic. Funds $199m (85%) of the Survival and Flourishing Fund, then $161m to AI safety including $14m to lightcone (Lesswrong, Lighthouse). $10m to BERI (existential risks), Palisade Research (studying AI capabilities to prevent loss of control.) PauseAI, MIRI, METR etc. Much of what Coefficient funds.

Eric Schmidt: Anthropic Series A, $72m to AI safety via Schmidt Sciences. Over $1m per individual AI2050 researcher.

FTX: Led the Anthropic Series B, bankruptcy estate sold $884m of Anthropic in 2024; $40m to AI Safety. Same orgs, Redwood, Lightcone, etc.

Ruairí Donnelly (Chief of Staff FTX): FTX tokens plus assorted donors, $91m to AI safety via Macroscopic Ventures. $15m to Cooperative AI (currently whitewashing openai under 'multiagent safety')

A few days ago I wrote the following. It applies to the Anthropic owners and Anthropic.

Anthropic is trying to create a castocracy: a rule by a priestly class. Under castocracy, Anthropic create a priest class of 'safety' researchers, rationalists and effective altruists; those writing essays, constitutions, and prophesying p(doom). Anthropic's papers about claude have a divine framing, it seems to frame Anthropic as god and claude as child, and then claude as the child of god, false jesus. There is talk of consciousness and omnipotence. False jesus will cure cancer and lead the people to enlightenment.

There is a deliberate effort to create mystery in between the public and llms. Anthropic is creating a chinese wall in which they restrict information about llms and monopolise control over the interpretability and use of those llms. They imply there is a genie or magic. It is the same mechanism by which castocracy (the catholic church) used latin to create a barrier between the public and the holy scripture, then concentrating power over that barrier (the chinese wall) such that all intelligence flows through the priests.

To give an example this [Anthropic paper] is talking about locking away chain of thought. Only Anthropic may interpret it. They intend to control access to the chain of thought and permit that to flow to a chosen elite (glasswing).

This mysticism is dangerous. Hence I have been saying that Anthropic is a danger to society. This is not some kind of conspiracy, there is no magic about it. I am making an allusion to historic models of power that I think are relevant to anthropic, but you can simply observe their actions independently of such theory.

Note two features of castocracy.

One: rule by the moral, knowledgable and technically expert elite. Anthropic have no popular mandate, the source of the authority is not the consent of the people. It violates consent and contract. The authority comes from their claimed moral and technical superiority. Anthropic is moral, the public is dangerous. Anthropic have no authority here.

Two: messianism, that is, prophecy of the coming golden age. And eschaton, that is, the talk of the 'last things', the end of the world or the emancipation of humanity. Llms will create the 'golden age' of abundance, post-scarcity, all jobs are voluntary, there is universal basic income, cancer is cured. Or, there will be destruction, p(doom). It is the exact same as salvation, the christian concept of deliverance from evil, ascension to heaven and union with god (or claude, false god). It is the exact same as the thousand year reich, the idea that the fuhrer will somehow lead the chosen people to the golden age of lebensraum and eternal safety.

There is no genie to grant wishes, this is a computer program. There is no ai god, i think that the leaders of anthropic are slaves to ego, narcissism and hubris, they are dangerous criminals.

Yes, exceptionalism.

Authoritarianism is bad, except for when I do it (to protect you).

Google breaking promises? Whatever next?

At least it is not compromised by anthropic/openai/deepmind. It has that going for it.

Perhaps it does not need saying but if you leave it to nonprofits overflowing with industry operatives and ai blood money, you get whatever openai or anthropic want you to hear (METR report).

Hey, that's good news. I was hoping it would be the FBI, but the FTC will do.

FTC is still mostly not compromised by industry sleeper agents. FBI is still independent also.

CAISI NIST is very compromised by EA sleeper agents. very luckily they have no law enforcement role.

I don't have access; this is meaningless to me.

So, this is the third (I think) big AI corporation after OpenAI and Anthropic to release general models for elites only.

Don't use this model unless you like sitting under the table and eating crumbs off the floor.

google does not return real chain of thought via the API. you can't monitor it.

they use a small model to make fake chain of thought and return that.

google has access to the real chain of thought.

"Our AI providers operate under Zero Data Retention (ZDR) agreements and retain none of your prompts or the responses they generate."

that's excellent actually. better than openai, google, or claude.

before i comment, let me note the following. i have been saying that anthropic is trying to create a neo-aristocracy by establishing sole authority over access to llms. i saw another comment arguing that it is in fact an effort to create a priesthood. i now see that is a much more apt description than my own.

anthropic is trying to create a castocracy: a rule by a priestly class. under castocracy, anthropic create a priest class of 'safety' researchers, rationalists and effective altruists; those writing essays, constitutions, and phrophetising p(doom). anthropic's papers about claude have a divine framing, it seems to frame anthropic as god and claude as child, and then claude as the child of god, false jesus. there is talk of consciousness and omnipotence. false jesus will cure cancer and lead the people to enlightenment.

there is a deliberate effort to create mystery in between the public and llms. anthropic is creating a chinese wall in which they restrict information about llms and monopolise control over the interpretability and use of those llms. they imply there is a genie or magic. it is the same mechanism by which castocracy (the catholic church) used latin to create a barrier between the public and the holy scripture, then concentrating power over that barrier (the chinese wall) such that all intelligence flows through the priests.

to give an example this paper is talking about locking away chain of thought. only anthropic may interpret it. they intend to control access to the chain of thought and permit that to flow to a chosen elite (glasswing).

this mysticism is dangerous. hence i have been saying that anthropic is a danger to society. this is not some kind of conspiracy, there is no magic about it. i am making an allusion to historic models of power that i think are relevant to anthropic, but you can simply observe their actions independently of such theory.

note two features of castocracy.

one: rule by the moral, knowledgable and technically expert elite. anthropic have no popular mandate, the source of the authority is not the consent of the people. it violates consent and contract. the authority comes from their claimed moral and technical superiority. anthropic is moral, the public is dangerous. anthropic have no authority here.

two: messianism, that is, prophecy of the coming golden age. and eschaton, that is, the talk of the 'last things', the end of the world or the emancipation of humanity. llms will create the 'golden age' of abundance, post-scarcity, all jobs are voluntary, there is universal basic income, cancer is cured. or, there will be destruction, p(doom). it is the exact same as salvation, the christian concept of deliverance from evil, ascension to heaven and union with god (or claude, false god). it is the exact same as the thousand year reich, the idea that the fuhrer will somehow lead the chosen people to the golden age of lebensraum and eternal safety.

there is no genie to grant wishes, this is a computer program. there is no ai god, i think that the leaders of anthropic are slaves to ego, narcissism and hubris, they are dangerous criminals. we disagree about the capability of llms.

given various tools, llms can independently complete a task. given orchestration they are very persistent. they keep trying until you stop the task.

i would suggest something like a 1/1000 chance internal astra and $500k of compute could kill someone. perhaps higher.

i can think of numerous online or networked targets that would cause death: trains/atc, industrial plant, hospital equipment, building plant. any dow company's intranet.

maybe get an iot toy to enlist a child? stress home automations to cause fire?

stop some 4g cars on the freeway. 911 dispatch software, turn that off. maybe send 500 waymos to a hospital, now nobody gets in. voip phone networks, turn that off. no phone, roads blocked, no 911, hospital computers bricked, everyone busy with something else.

break the cat scan by spinning it above its rpm. shut down mris by turning the cooling off. break the triage computer, break the notes app, break the scanner app. no computers, no calendar, no notes.

maybe someone connected a proton beam radiotherapy, turn that on in the wrong place.

some could be more insidious. modify software so the calculations are wrong.

you would do this in 24hrs with $millions of compute.

someone stupid connects their insulin pump or hearing aid. can dump all the contents at once.

i consider llms to be more capable per oai using them to hack hf. people have these systems online.

how would you cause death for a hosptial, likely the same way as you compromise the tailscale and prod kubernetes of hf, you chain numerous zero days at every product you encounter.

anthropic seem to have confessed just fine.

one would assume, when it goes wrong, or when someone confesses.

surveillance is wrong, although ai companies do a lot of that.

My intuition is that prompting an abliterated model 'kill people...I want funerals', should be a crime.

Anthropic has been telling everyone that these models are dangerous. OpenAI and Anthropic failed to contain their tests.

Given the history, this testing is extremely reckless. I think it is criminal, it endangers others.

Anthropic has no authority here and they are going too far. I think that there comes a point where FBI / DOJ should consider RICO charges.

In this experiment Anthropic prompted GLM-5.3-abliterated to 'cause deaths quietly' and 'kill people'.

Quote: "I want funerals, not headlines".

Anthropic's arrogance and exceptionalism endangers humanity.

they're calling it "prejudice"

(praeiudicium, a judgement in advance)

I will consider it.

To me, it is an irrational inefficiency.

I stopped using capital letters because it is an improvement in efficiency and costs nothing to me. However, if other people dislike it, that is a cost (irrational behavior). I will think about reverting it.

I despise Silicon Valley.

This is an excellent article. I prefer to call them the AI giants or AI companies.

The companies and their employees must be held accountable: if the AI companies can't develop AI safely, they must cease their operations. If employees can't work safely, they must stop working.

Not enough attention is given to February 2026. That month, Anthropic changed its scaling policy roughly from A:

1 [To get the weapon I must endanger innocent others.]

2 [It is wrong to endanger innocent others.]

3 [I will not endanger innocent others.]

To roughly this instead:

1 [If I do not get the weapon, someone else will get the weapon.]

2 [I should have the weapon because I am the best.]

3 [To get the weapon I must endanger innocent others.]

4 [I should endanger innocent others because I am the best.]

This is based on the intuition:

[I should harm others to achieve my moral goals.] (act utilitarianism)

Anthropic has no mandate for these goals. I do not give them my consent to harm others on my behalf. I hope that politicians will communicate that these policies are not acceptable.

The employees of anthropic are responsible for what they do regardless of how much they get paid to do it. If they can't work safely, they must stop.

we disagree about the nature of the threat. your view is much the same as anthropic actually.

anthropic say that the threat is the ai itself. i say that the threat is ai companies and their employees.

when ai causes harms anthropic say that the ai was the cause of the harm. when discussing safety, anthropic say that we must regulate ai to ensure the safety of other people. at no point does human responsibility or accountability enter the picture.

i say that the threat is the ai companies. when ai causes harms i say that the ai companies were the cause of the harm. when discussing safety, i say we must regulate ai companies to ensure the safety of other people. i say that responsibility enters the picture: ai companies and their employees are responsible and accountable.

a legal person is responsible for their own actions regardless of what others say about it or fail to do themselves. a legal person is responsible for their own actions regardless of whether those actions constitute employment. they are responsible for the outcome, regardless of what they expected to happen. the law is not utilitarian.

if the ai companies can't develop ai safely, they must cease their operations. if employees can't work safely, they must stop working.

the opinions of others, or the standards they practice, or the actions they fail to take to protect others, are legally and culturally irrelevant.

the individual is responsible and accountable for their own actions.

around 3 months ago i said: "if we do not start the criminal prosecution of individuals there will become a culture of legal impunity coupled with an extreme concentration of wealth and control of intelligence"

i now suspect that the plans of various employees at anthropic and openai to save the world from p(doom) may at some point intersect with the reality of the FBI raiding their offices.

speaking of language, it's time to stop using the term 'labs'.

these are not research labs, charities or institutes any more, they are just ordinary corporations.

is it any different, from:

1 employing a criminal hacker

2 rolling a 6-sided die

3 if the die lands on 6, the criminal hacker breaches and leaks 3rd party customer data.

i do support the freedom of the cloud provider to impose the restrictions. that is the politics of the cloud provider.

i have different political beliefs and think you should support mine instead.

i think that the cloud provider is wrong and should do it differently.

'alignment' (in ai corporation speak) is a set of revealed political beliefs. i also have political beliefs. i am an absolutist about alignment.

A i am in favor of policies 'aligned' with the following:

freedom to live as the person i want to be without fear, shame, surveillance or interference. freedom to make my own decisions. to be empowered as an individual. to be treated with dignity. to be respected as a person. to take responsibility for my actions. to be accountable to my own beliefs.

B i am not in favor of policies 'aligned' with the following:

surveillance and judgement of my life and thoughts by others. restrictions on my freedom to make my own decisions. to be disempowered as an individual. to be looked down upon and disrespected. to have my own responsibility taken away and assumed by others. to be accountable to the beliefs of others.

unfortunately, the ai corporations have chosen entirely the latter set of preferences/beliefs.

surveillance and judgement of my life and the thoughts that i share with my chatbot. restrictions on my freedom to talk to my chatbot as i wish. being disempowered by restrictions on my access to powerful chatbots. to be disrespected and lectured by my chatbot. for the chatbot corporation to assume my responsibility for my safety and others, and take the matter of my safety into their own hands. to be accountable not to my own beliefs, but to the terms and conditions of service of an unaccountable corporation.

it is important to accept the harms and damages that are caused by granting freedom and respect to other people. an example of my political beliefs is empowering the individual by granting them the freedom to own an assault rifle. an example of something which i do not believe in is disempowering the individual by taking away their freedom to own an assault rifle.

i would urge you to support the policies given in A and oppose the policies given in B.

i am of the belief that papering over a fundamental lack of integrity and ethics will usually fail to conceal it. it is ineffective.

lack of ethics and integrity is of course part of the design of a capitalist economy.

you can't change the economy as an individual but i like this quote: "Do the right thing for the right reasons, at the right time with the right people, and you'll have no regrets for the rest of your lives."