Examples of fairly critical remarks about Anthropic’s actions. All more recent than your timeframe, because twitter’s search function is a pain and because my memory for twitter etc discussion is less good. https://x.com/S_OhEigeartaigh/status/2029475839654388069 (re: gullible bunch memo)
(I am followed by some prominent US policy people, including the outgoing white house AI adviser, so if there were a bias against people who criticise Anthropic, I would expect to be punished pretty harshly)
And while ongoing commentary on their safety/policy actions might not count for your criteria, this paper has been influential enough with policymakers that it probably counts (and goes against aspects of Anthropic’s stance on China that underlies a lot of their positions). https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=5278644
Your essay was a good read but it is an incredibly low bar if we count it as “critical of Anthropic”.
My equivalent would be trying to get funding for serious advocacy or policy work that went against Anthropic’s position.
Examples of fairly critical remarks about Anthropic’s actions. All more recent than your timeframe, because twitter’s search function is a pain and because my memory for twitter etc discussion is less good.
https://x.com/S_OhEigeartaigh/status/2029475839654388069 (re: gullible bunch memo)
https://x.com/S_OhEigeartaigh/status/2026957849994108990 (re: walking back RSP commitments)
https://x.com/S_OhEigeartaigh/status/2019518744561873286 (re: safety evaluations)
(I am followed by some prominent US policy people, including the outgoing white house AI adviser, so if there were a bias against people who criticise Anthropic, I would expect to be punished pretty harshly)
And while ongoing commentary on their safety/policy actions might not count for your criteria, this paper has been influential enough with policymakers that it probably counts (and goes against aspects of Anthropic’s stance on China that underlies a lot of their positions). https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=5278644