“What are the odds that the first three quote tweets of Coxon’s post would all be major AI-restriction policy advocates funded generously by the same donor, who also happens to be one of the leading investors in, and a board member of, Anthropic, the company Coxon was resigning from? And all within 15 minutes of posting (two within ten)?”
This is more of the same "all AI opposition is a psyop" bs we see with data centers, and the author of this tweet works at a think tank consistently peddling that: https://capitalresearch.org/tag/ai/. Quote tweeting someone within 15 minutes of their cry for help is not evidence of psyop.
Sure but he's pretty successful at creating a moral panic. Without a proper response people like him will succeed at a lot more than that. What are you going to do about it, besides commenting?
> We at Gizmodo were gobsmacked by the sheer size of the reaction to Coxon’s not-at-all breaking news. As Coxon himself acknowledged, he wasn’t revealing any hidden secrets about the beliefs of AI’s industry leaders.
The Anthropic employee quoted in the article is doing a great job of saying things that no PR/communications department would ever, ever want an employee to say:
> Jacob is correct here—we really do earnestly believe AI could kill all humans! I personally think it is >10% within the next decade. I believe Anthropic is trying its best, but we do not yet have a plan to solve alignment for superintelligence and are not clearly on track to.
The goal isn’t positive PR. It’s to have governments take note and come down hard on Anthropic and OpenAI with regulations that they’ll ultimately have a hand in writing or providing testimony for.
Those regulations will ever so coincidentally make it difficult for anyone else to get as big as they are, and demonize open weights, Chinese AI, abliteration, etc
Which upstarts are the frontier labs threatened by except for each other? The "regulatory capture" arguments make zero sense. Especially since their lobbying arms are trying to reject any kind of regulation: https://x.com/AlexBores/status/2097846545408262403
“What are the odds that the first three quote tweets of Coxon’s post would all be major AI-restriction policy advocates funded generously by the same donor, who also happens to be one of the leading investors in, and a board member of, Anthropic, the company Coxon was resigning from? And all within 15 minutes of posting (two within ten)?”
https://x.com/parkerthayer/status/2097759699626328575
This is more of the same "all AI opposition is a psyop" bs we see with data centers, and the author of this tweet works at a think tank consistently peddling that: https://capitalresearch.org/tag/ai/. Quote tweeting someone within 15 minutes of their cry for help is not evidence of psyop.
This guy is part of an ai policy think tank. This is all staged.
Sure but he's pretty successful at creating a moral panic. Without a proper response people like him will succeed at a lot more than that. What are you going to do about it, besides commenting?
Anthropic's marketing department is so creative
This is all consistent with the beliefs of many AI (and EA) types who are not associated with the company.
> We at Gizmodo were gobsmacked by the sheer size of the reaction to Coxon’s not-at-all breaking news. As Coxon himself acknowledged, he wasn’t revealing any hidden secrets about the beliefs of AI’s industry leaders.
Are we supposed to be comforted by this?
The Anthropic employee quoted in the article is doing a great job of saying things that no PR/communications department would ever, ever want an employee to say:
> Jacob is correct here—we really do earnestly believe AI could kill all humans! I personally think it is >10% within the next decade. I believe Anthropic is trying its best, but we do not yet have a plan to solve alignment for superintelligence and are not clearly on track to.
The goal isn’t positive PR. It’s to have governments take note and come down hard on Anthropic and OpenAI with regulations that they’ll ultimately have a hand in writing or providing testimony for.
Those regulations will ever so coincidentally make it difficult for anyone else to get as big as they are, and demonize open weights, Chinese AI, abliteration, etc
Which upstarts are the frontier labs threatened by except for each other? The "regulatory capture" arguments make zero sense. Especially since their lobbying arms are trying to reject any kind of regulation: https://x.com/AlexBores/status/2097846545408262403