[cardy31]

Because most people in tech never took a philosophy course or an ethics course and think that tech is obviously a good for the world and that there are no downsides to advancing tech. So any efforts that try to apply ethics to it are overreaching, ignorant, and futile in the face of the good that is tech!

[wolpoli]

Or alternatively, it is plain and obvious that Anthropic is using ethics to justify business decisions.

[borski]

Not any efforts.

But this one is certainly allowed to be a dumb effort, if it is.

Not all things that are called “ethical” or “safety” are worth doing.

[vzcx]

Or... they just disagree with Anthropic's ethical stances and approach to applying them?

[siva7]

So i have big news for you my friend as i'm not sure you understand such courses. Taking an ethics course won't make you a more ethical person.. and taking a philosophy course neither.

[make3]

You're being too literal, they're saying people are not thinking with a philosophically interested mind, which is blatantly the case here, their point stands.

[enraged_camel]

I like this take. Especially because one of the sibling comments framed Anthropic's stance as "paternalism." Trying to be ethical and to minimize harm, even at great expense to one's finances and reputation, is paternalistic apparently.

[zmgsabst]

No — we’ve just taken Ethics 102 as well, so we understand good intentions don’t entail positive outcomes, therefore you may need to criticize or oppose people who state good intentions to bring about good outcomes.

Insulting and demeaning people for that, rather than engaging their arguments in good faith, is a breach of ethics.

[Rudybega]

I mean, if you take HN commenters to have the thoughtfulness and foresight of children, then the word kind of works.