This is a special post for quick takes by Zach Stein-Perlman. Only they can create top-level comments. Comments here also appear on the Quick Takes page and All Posts page.
Comment Permalink
Showing 3 of 6 replies (Click to show all)
1
20
I'm surprised at the mix of positions that are included. "Opposed unless amended" vs "Support if amended" being two different things. Meta just saying "concerned."
It makes sense, just sort of... delightful? Sort of like discovering the legislature has almost a rationalist level of React Icons.
14
I think you're eliding the difference between "powerful capabilities" being developed, the window of risk, and the best solution.
For example, if Anthropic believes "_we_ will have it internally in 1-3 years, but no small labs will, and we can contain it internally" then they might conclude that the warrant for a state-level FMD is low. Alternatively, you might conclude, "we will have it internally in 1-3 years, other small labs will be close behind, and an American state's capabilities won't be sufficient, we need DoD, FBI, and IC authorities to go stompy on this threat", and thus think a state-level FMD is low-value-add.
Very unsure I agree with either of these hypos to be clear! Just trying to explore the possibility space and point out this is complex.
15
Agreed, sloppy phrasing on my part. The letter clearly states some of Anthropic's key views, but doesn't discuss other important parts of their worldview. Overall this is much better than some of their previous communications and the OpenAI letter, so I think it deserves some praise, but your caveat is also important.