I find this version unlikely, since companies very rarely genuinely believe what they preach in PR campaigns. It's always some sales and marketting dudes and gals trying to polish up something as something more than it is. Which is very annoying. We can now choose between Anthropic being the one exception to this, while having huuuuge incentive to hype up their product, or we just write it off as more marketting fluff.
I would be very surprised if this is an actual thought-out PR strategy. I am far more inclined to believe that their employees are just bought-in to the future where AI is genuinely transformative.
Whether they are right of wrong is another matter, but their claims also don’t seem too far out of the realm of possibility to me.
Coding agents have fundamentally changed my day-to-day job. In the last year, my work has shifted from me writing all of my code, to me writing very little code and spending most of my time on understanding problems better and setting direction, and reviewing, verifying, and polishing the output of coding agents. It has been quite a drastic change.
It is not that outlandish to suggest that coding agents could continue to improve at such a drastic rate over the next year. And the implications of that could be quite large! Even just the implications of more white-collar workers adopting tools like Cowork seems potentially very large, with tools that already exist today. It seems sensible to at least consider this as a possibility.
Dario is no John hammond though. That'd be altman. He actually has the discipline and background as an ai scientist to tell what the potential failure modes are. You're right, he might still be just hyping things up, but generally i'd give more benefit of doubts to anthropic. Precisely because Dario was a scientist and I'd stand by it. People who get their phd in science already self-select, or proven at least to be made of different stuff.
Likewise, people don't as easily blame ilya for 'hyping things up' when he said these things.
Also talk about incentives, there are also incentives to lower their valuation. If you wanna be vigilant against social engineering i'd be wary of that too.
These are moot anyway though cause the article isnt even making any super strong claim. If you read it it's no big deal
This is obviously the case to me, but I think HN is very anti-AI.
I genuinely don't believe that they sat down in a board room and said "yeah lets specifically release this now before an IPO so we can juice it!" They haven't even announced an IPO date. So is every blog on capabilities before that date just "pumping up the value of the stock before the IPO?"
If they actually have concerns they can communicate them directly and privately. There are less than 10 companies, in only 2 countries, with advanced enough AI programs to qualify for this type of concern. And Anthropic has the phone numbers for all of them.
Companies do tons of communication and work directly, without press releases or blog posts. If a statement is released publicly, it is done for a PR purpose.
It is not solely or even primarily the big AI labs that would need to prepare. They have a better idea of what’s coming, and they’re positioned to benefit from it.
It is governments, big companies, and individuals who could all experience fundamental changes if any of these predictions come true. If people within the labs believe these possibilities are around the corner, it would be responsible to try to let people know so they can be more ready if RSI suddenly hits and in a couple years time all our work is fundamentally changed.
That’s not to say I agree with their predictions, but rather I’m just saying that there are good reasons for Anthropic to publish stuff like this that are not just PR.