In a day of keynotes across two stages, Anthropic executives let rip a firehose of technical details about how coders should best use AI to increase their productivity. The mood in the room was one of nearly unbridled enthusiasm. Boris Cherny, the creator of Claude Code, proclaimed that AI had helped him reconnect with the feeling of magic that first got him into programming on a school calculator. Developers I met spoke of a renaissance in computer programming, with more opportunities available than people to exploit them.
Thursday was a very different experience. I hopped on a train to Oxford University, where Anthropic’s co-founder Jack Clark was scheduled to give a lecture. Clark is a fascinating figure. Much of his work over the years has involved measuring, and then warning about, the rate of AI progress and its many attendant risks. This lecture was no different. He said AI posed a “non-zero” chance of killing everybody on the planet, and warned that even if this total crisis were averted, the next few years would contain more disruption than any in living memory.
It would be easy—and comforting—to dismiss this as a billionaire executive talking up his own technology for self-interested reasons. But another way to interpret this lecture, and indeed much of Anthropic’s work as a company, is as a warning from the people who are closest to this strange new technology, and who can see where it is headed. The arrival in April of Claude Mythos—Anthropic’s latest model, which has nation-state-level cyber-offensive capabilities—shows that many of Anthropic’s past predictions were correct, and that the future they predicted is in some sense already here. The model is so powerful that Anthropic decided not to release it publicly, and has instead given a small group of companies and governments access in order to patch vulnerabilities in the world’s most commonly-used software.
It is not nefarious, nor even surprising, that Anthropic is speaking differently to policymakers than developers. Companies tailor messages to different groups all the time, and Anthropic has been open about AI’s risks in ways other companies have chosen to stay silent about. Still, experiencing these two different narratives so close together gave me a profound sense of whiplash. In one sense, Anthropic has a credible claim to hold the keys to perhaps the most powerful technology of all time, while taking it upon itself to warn governments and societies of that inconvenient fact. In another very real sense, it is still a normal software company, dependent on the whims of fickle developers in hoodies and jeans.
If Clark is right, nothing about this moment in time will last for long. The developers Anthropic is currently so dependent on will find themselves replaced by machines faster than they can say “recursive self-improvement.” Perhaps that's why his predictions didn't find their way into Wednesday's keynotes.
Hence then, the article about a tale of two anthropics was published today ( ) and is available on Time ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( A Tale of Two Anthropics )
Also on site :