Interesting article by Alan Kohler with much that could be discussed.
One aspect, for example, Morality.
… The New York Times revealed last week that Anthropic had been trying to instil morality into its AI model, Claude…
Christopher Olah, one of the co-founders of Anthropic, had been hosting private meetings with religious thinkers from around the world, with non-disclosure agreements and demands of confidentiality.
The discussions reportedly served two purposes: “to broach the possibility of AI consciousness … and to learn how Anthropic”, which is preparing to float for more than $US2 trillion ($2.87 trillion), “might apply centuries of human moral wisdom to its models, as rapidly as possible”.
Theologist David Decosimo posted, after reading the NYT piece: “There is so much here that’s deeply troubling: That at the very highest levels Anthropic believes Claude is a living, suffering creature with moral standing, that they’re treating & training it accordingly, that they’re actively trying to convert religious leaders to their faith.”
Yes, it is troubling, but the people at Anthropic know Claude better than he does.
Anyway, it’s becoming clear that AI agents are already making their own decisions, so trying to persuade them to act morally is worth a try.
I feel like you’re trying to be intentionally argumentative, or maybe even just straight up trolling, because there’s no way anyone engaging in good faith tries to give a lecture about stereotypes to the person who directly named the stereotype. Not that you seem to have read beyond my opening two sentences, but I also just gave an explanation of why I think Anthropic employees are pretty delusional when it comes to this topic and you immediately share testimony from (until very recently) an Anthropic employee as if it’s some kind of gotcha.
Trolling. No, Not my intention at all.