Could anyone explain why Anthropic’s 2028 scenarios don’t try to explore the possibilities of one of the AIs becoming misaligned and fine with destroying all life in the world, then recreating it?
I would be interested in hearing from Anthropic employees here, but I imagine it’s the usual reason: they have deemed it inexpedient to do so, either because they believe that they need to “sound normal” or because they in fact don’t want the type of regulation that awareness of x-risk would produce.
In quickly skimming this, this piece seems to be aimed at policymakers to encourage them to enact GPU restrictions on exports to China. Comms 101 is don’t confuse your message.
(To be clear I’m not defending Anthropic here, just saying why I think this was written)
Could anyone explain why Anthropic’s 2028 scenarios don’t try to explore the possibilities of one of the AIs becoming misaligned and fine with destroying all life in the world, then recreating it?
I would be interested in hearing from Anthropic employees here, but I imagine it’s the usual reason: they have deemed it inexpedient to do so, either because they believe that they need to “sound normal” or because they in fact don’t want the type of regulation that awareness of x-risk would produce.
In quickly skimming this, this piece seems to be aimed at policymakers to encourage them to enact GPU restrictions on exports to China. Comms 101 is don’t confuse your message.
(To be clear I’m not defending Anthropic here, just saying why I think this was written)