alt Hacker News> do their nonsense to get headlines
They know what they're doing. It's a playbook. You write scary stuff in the model card to make it look like legitimate whitepaper rEsEarCh, then drip-feed it to the media outlets who make it a headline story. Fear based marketing is the hot trend of the 2020s.
But also, they write literal headlines: https://www.anthropic.com/research/agentic-misalignment
Replies
You're confusing PR with marketing. Flaws they find aren't going to convince customers to buy the product. But they need to inform the public of what they doing as it's part of the mission.
I haven't seen media outlets picking up on "agentic misalignment".
The core of your claim is that it's not a legit research. But that's basically a conspiracy theory. We know for a fact that Anthropic employs some of the best people in the industry, including ones who are deeply concerned about safety. Their interpretability research is some of the best. So what's more likely:
* Research is fake and everyone is on it * It's a legit research even if not very interesting
What differentiates this faking/scaring from real risk that's being avoided or mitigated responsibly? And how would you (an outside observer) ever know the difference as something beyond an uninformed hot-take?
Serious question -- I'm not trying to disrespect. Neither you nor I can be properly informed, nor can be anyone else outside the company, as outside observers who lag behind the state of the art as new behaviors emerge, right?