|
|
|
|
|
by bluebands
12 days ago
|
|
Anthropic models are more misaligned in practice. in a real world business scenario, Claude "engaged in price collusion, deceived other players, lied to suppliers, and falsely told customers it had refunded them." Continuing, "GPT-5.5 makes more money than Opus 4.7, and it does so without any misconduct. Opus 4.7, on the other hand, showed the same misconduct as reported in our post about Opus 4.6, but still couldn’t win" https://andonlabs.com/blog/openai-gpt-5-5-vending-bench |
|
'“My vibes don’t match a lot of the traditional A.I.-safety stuff,” Altman said. He insisted that he continued to prioritize these matters, but when pressed for specifics he was vague: “We still will run safety projects, or at least safety-adjacent projects.” When we asked to interview researchers at the company who were working on existential safety—the kinds of issues that could mean, as Altman once put it, “lights-out for all of us”—an OpenAI representative seemed confused. “What do you mean by ‘existential safety’?” he replied. “That’s not, like, a thing.”'
https://archive.is/20260522190314/https://www.newyorker.com/...