Anthropic and OpenAI have been quite successful at promoting the view that their models are very capable or even dangerous. By exaggerating the risks of these models they create a reputation as morally conscious, safety-oriented companies that nevertheless have the best models that everyone should be aware of. This gets the sympathies of investors and AI safety people alike.
But of course they must sell their models to get their money back.
So you’re saying it’s all BS? You’re saying that Anthropic and OpenAI ultimately don’t care about AI alignment? It sure seems like it for me, but browsing this website I have the feeling most people disagree with you
There is a limit to how much a for-profit company can care about safety. It is of existential importance to make profit, so you have to sell your product. It’s just how it is.
OpenAI and Anthropic are technically public benefit companies that have other objectives than just profit, but to my understanding they are formulated in a way that makes them not relevant currently, so profit is more important.
I don’t say that there aren’t people in these companies that care about safety, or that safety is completely ignored when developing products, just that there is a limit to how far the companies will consider safety.
I understand that, but my point is that I thought these were AI safety companies, and would therefore prioritize AI safety above all else. If they don’t, why do so many people still treat them as if they did?
Am I missing something obvious? Don’t Anthropic and OpenAI claim to be for AI safety research?
That’s marketing.
Anthropic and OpenAI have been quite successful at promoting the view that their models are very capable or even dangerous. By exaggerating the risks of these models they create a reputation as morally conscious, safety-oriented companies that nevertheless have the best models that everyone should be aware of. This gets the sympathies of investors and AI safety people alike.
But of course they must sell their models to get their money back.
So you’re saying it’s all BS? You’re saying that Anthropic and OpenAI ultimately don’t care about AI alignment? It sure seems like it for me, but browsing this website I have the feeling most people disagree with you
There is a limit to how much a for-profit company can care about safety. It is of existential importance to make profit, so you have to sell your product. It’s just how it is.
OpenAI and Anthropic are technically public benefit companies that have other objectives than just profit, but to my understanding they are formulated in a way that makes them not relevant currently, so profit is more important.
I don’t say that there aren’t people in these companies that care about safety, or that safety is completely ignored when developing products, just that there is a limit to how far the companies will consider safety.
I understand that, but my point is that I thought these were AI safety companies, and would therefore prioritize AI safety above all else. If they don’t, why do so many people still treat them as if they did?