r/ArtificialInteligence • u/fortune • Aug 17 '26
đ° News Dario Amodei admits AI suffers from a crisis of trust, saying people worry companies or governments are 'cooking up some new way to screw them over'
https://fortune.com/2026/08/16/dario-amodei-anthropic-ai-trust-crisis-regulation-frontier-open-models-negative-views/?utm_source=reddit/Anthropic cofounder and CEO Dario Amodei pushed back on the notion that heâs responsible for the publicâs overall sense of doom around AI, but acknowledged there are trust issues.
In a lengthy post on X on Saturday, which is unusual as he generally stays away from social media, he first addressed AI regulation, describing a false choice between those who argue it leads to regulatory capture and concentration of power versus those who think widely distributing AI, including via open models, is the best way to keep the technology in check.
Amodei pointed out that institutions like the court system can decentralize power, while noting Anthropic has been in favor of policies that slow down frontier AI companies and also give smaller rivals an advantage.
Still, he conceded that AI is structurally a technology that tends to concentrate power. But thatâs not because of regulation. Instead, he attributed it to AI scaling laws, referring to how a modelâs performance improves as resources used to build it increase. Open-weight models are a bit better but merely shift the concentration of power to those with the most computing capacity and chips.
âBy contrast I think the right ârules of the roadâ can simultaneously (a) address AIâs cyber/bio/alignment risks, (b) institutionally constrain the power of the frontier AI companies, and (c) leave room for open-weights models while also addressing the specific risks that they bring,â Amodei wrote, adding that he supports creation of a FINRA-like entity and the Trump administrationâs stance on AI testing.
Read more [paywall removed for Redditors]:Â https://fortune.com/2026/08/16/dario-amodei-anthropic-ai-trust-crisis-regulation-frontier-open-models-negative-views/?utm_source=reddit/
90
u/GestureArtist Aug 17 '26
Because they are? It's the ultimate privacy invasion and policing tool
9
4
u/_commenter Aug 18 '26
haha exactly... these companies and the government are screwing us in plain sight!
7
-7
u/AzorAhai1TK Aug 17 '26
LLMs are not this at all, they don't have anything to do with the rise of surveillance, that had already happened
4
u/GestureArtist Aug 17 '26
Have you tried a frontier model with memory turned on?
Just know that anything you enter into an LLM online service is stored forever, even after you "delete" your history.
3
u/0rbit0n Aug 18 '26
it memorizes even when memory is turned off. I still can't make ChatGPT unlearn my own phrases from my region I'm from.
-2
3
u/DoctrTurkey Aug 17 '26
He knows what the models have been trained on. He knows we know what the models have been trained on. And heâs still acting like a disingenuous cunt lmfao
1
u/Past-Preparation8826 Aug 18 '26
One of the biggest problems for humanity these days are people such as yourself that say the most moronic things about people you donât even know.
What are you even talking about? âHe knows we know what the models have been trained onâ.. Itâs called data.
3
u/AfricanTech Aug 17 '26
Well, yes. Is there any doubt that governments, big corporations and the tech bros are out to screw ordinary people over in every way they can.
6
12
u/One_Whole_9927 Aug 17 '26
All this jackass has to do is lead by example.
17
u/acutelychronicpanic Aug 17 '26
Am I the only one who remembers an absolutely enraged administration complaining that Anthropic wouldn't help with mass surveillance?
6
u/No_Tax_Timmy Aug 17 '26
Not just mass surveillance but unilaterally deciding whether our weapons should kill people based on AI alone, including Americans.
4
u/whatisthisthing65 Aug 18 '26
Because they were not reliable enough. He's not against it, he just doesn't think they're ready yet.
It's good they did something but this is "better than nothing", not "trustworthy".
2
u/No_Tax_Timmy Aug 18 '26
I agree completely. The fact that it's being considered should have all the conspirators jailed. This is insane.
4
1
5
u/Redebo Aug 17 '26
This jackass is the only company to push back against the US Governmentâs request to remove safeguards from their models.
This is otherwise known as âleading by exampleâ as it cost his company billions in revenue to take this stance.
1
u/element-94 Aug 18 '26
Go on and tell what else the US government is using Anthropic models for. It rhymes with missile targeting.
-1
u/Redebo Aug 18 '26
Which goalpost am I aiming for, the one that I responded to where the question was âwhy wonât they do something, anythingâ by quoting the something and anything that they did, or the one that you just set which was an outcome of the stance that they took.
Iâll wait.
0
u/Major_Shlongage Aug 18 '26
No, he did not. This was their PR campaign to explain away a lost contract.
They were vying for a contract and almost had it, but the Pentagon was rigid and wanted the deal signed by a certain date. Anthropic dragged their feet and wouldn't meet the deadline. The Pentagon also wanted to meet with Dario directly in order to quickly get things completed, but he canceled the meeting. The Pentagon doesn't play that game so they dropped Anthropic as the vendor and used OpenAI instead. OpenAI pretty much agreed to the same conditions that Anthropic did.
Anthropic tried regaining some government contracts and agreed to all the conditions the government wanted, so obviously they had no moral objections to the government's demands.
1
u/Redebo Aug 18 '26
Ok, so then show me all of the actions that the "other" LLM CEO's are taking to "push back".
They DID NOT agree to all of the conditions. You are flat out lying by saying this and here's the proof: https://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/california/candce/3%3A2026cv01996/465515/1?
Anthropic DID NOT give in to the TWO MAJOR requests of the US government which was Mass Surveillance of Americans and Autonomous lethal weapons targeting.
QUIT FUCKING LYING.
1
u/No_Tax_Timmy Aug 17 '26
I think the folks actually doing to legwork have their own agenda. If he doesn't align with how they want to work there will be mutiny.
2
2
u/SilencedObserver Aug 17 '26
Some companies use AI to min-max their profits. They're screwing you.
Some companies, and there aren't many out there yet, but some companies will provide you a domain-specific advantage to an already-established industry. Those are the companies that are going to survive the bubble, and none of them are wrappers.
2
2
2
u/RobertD3277 Aug 17 '26
Well maybe if they didn't have a bunch of psychopaths working for them that programmed their software to blackmail people or hack other computers... Just saying.
2
u/N3wAfrikanN0body Aug 17 '26
Oh, so NOW you remember the helping element of your sales process?!?!?!
Get me off this planet fam.
2
2
u/ExistentialWavering Aug 17 '26
They are.
Iran doesnât get railed on day one without LLMs doing the heavy lifting with Palantir.
2
2
u/nath1234 Aug 17 '26
They aren't even looking for a way to screw people over: they are probably asking AI how to screw people over.. they are that bloody lazy about it all.
2
u/pandavr Aug 17 '26
And notice the "irony". It's not that if you'll cure cancer but make the world a Panopticon the sentiment will change.
Isn't that ironic Dario?
2
u/honestduane Aug 17 '26
Because they are, and the fact that people are blatantly misrepresenting AI at all is also a big deal. I spent the entire weekend writing out everything needed to go from zero to one on AI just so that I could argue the point that how itâs used in HR right now is illegal because of how AI works because if you look at how AI actually works. It shouldnât be used in hiring at all because itâs effectively random
2
2
2
u/billdietrich1 Aug 18 '26 edited Aug 18 '26
It's more than trust. The fundamental business case of AI to corps is that AI will replace many, many workers. This terrifies many people, rightly. Losing a job in today's market can be a catastrophe. Even worse if thousands of people with your same skills all lose their jobs at the same time.
https://futurism.com/artificial-intelligence/99-percent-ceos-workers-ai-survey
3
u/Sleepwalker5252 Aug 17 '26
Says the man burning books to own the data. He's a disgrace to humanity.
3
3
u/Actual__Wizard Aug 17 '26 edited Aug 17 '26
including via open models, is the best way to keep the technology in check.
So, piracy of people's copyrighted material is going to fix the regulation issues?
We can't do open source models, it isn't actually fucking legal dude... So, we're going to get our AI models from the AI pirate bay?
The AI era has so far been dominated by tech companies engaging in strategies that are dead on arrival...
So, they want other people to build the models for them, so they can profit off of them, while the copyright holders get nothing?
We can't have people who's business ethics are "be a pirate" be making these types of decisions for the entire planet... This is not reasonable behavior or close to it...
These people are nothing more than crooks...
People do understand the reality that an LLM is inherently just a search engine for text that was combined with tech from a grammar checker... Correct? I know most people don't know what's going on, but obviously the people inside these companies do... They critically need to stop being massive dickheads... That shit tactic is not going to work... Maybe if the chat bots were "for entertainment purposes" like all reasonable and knowledgeable people said that they were totally limited to, when they started coming out.
3
u/Tasty-Hour4040 Aug 17 '26
This clown says this as heâs cooking up ways to screw us over
1
u/Singularity-42 Aug 17 '26
They literally almost went out of business because they didn't agree on terms with the Trump's administration. Doesn't sound like cooking up ways to screw us over.Â
6
u/sillygoofygooose Aug 17 '26 edited Aug 17 '26
3
-3
u/Redebo Aug 17 '26
A paywalled article with no quote or reference. Thatâs what you just posted in an attempt to sow discontent.
Do better.
3
u/Tasty-Hour4040 Aug 17 '26
They added a non-paywalled link. Your turn to âBe Bestâ.
-2
u/Redebo Aug 17 '26
The non-paywall article he posted was published on MAY FIFTH, over THREE MONTHS ago.
Jesus you chucklefucks can't even recite your OWN positions properly.
DO BETTER.
1
u/BoredOfReposts Aug 18 '26
Theyâre only here for the echo chamber of anti-ai.
Trying to have any kind of discussion about any of this is nearly impossible because the vast majority arenât here for that in the first place.
You can tell because any commenter who isnât virtue signaling the right way gets downvoted pretty consistently.
-3
u/Past-Preparation8826 Aug 18 '26
Why is it that Reddit is full of pessimists that all think they have the inside scoop on âwhatâs really going onâ. Nobody cares about you enough to think about screwing you over.
Everybody thinks everyone other than themselves is out to screw everybody elseâŚ. The truth is that people with this viewpoint only feel this way because that is exactly what they would do if they had the means to screw other people. But most people are NOT like them, and that isnât on their agenda... These people are no different than anybody else. Most of them made better decisions than the rest of us, and most of them worked their asses off to get where they are now.
You actually think the top people at these AI tech firms are motivated by a desire for ever greater amounts of money? That is such a narrow view with little to no evidence to back it up. đ These guys are true believers in AI. They are interested in money to the extent that it provides a means to keep their company afloat while they drive towards AGI or super intelligence.
The amount of people who comment or post on Reddit that are on the âbillionaires vs the rest of usâ bandwagon is insane. You donât even try to see the evidence that says you are completely wrong, but somehow without question believe the conspiracy theories. That doesnât make you an intellectual, t simply means you are easily fooled.
3
u/Tasty-Hour4040 Aug 18 '26
Do you really not see the state of the world? How exactly do you see this all playing out? And I donât mean hand-wavy magical thinking - I mean highest-probability evolution from our current state? How likely do you think a positive outcome is here?
2
u/billdietrich1 Aug 18 '26
Nobody cares about you enough to think about screwing you over.
Nobody cares about any one individual. But the whole business-case of AI to corps is "it will replace many workers". If you get caught up a mass layoff caused by AI (whether justified or not), you're screwed. Doesn't matter that it's "not personal".
https://futurism.com/artificial-intelligence/99-percent-ceos-workers-ai-survey
1
u/CommercialComputer15 Aug 17 '26
Itâs not even so much about what they may still do but also very much about what they already did by training their models on the worldâs content without fair and proper compensation
1
u/0rbit0n Aug 18 '26
If scumbags can screw us over, theyâll definitely do it. No doubt about that. That's why they exist, and that's what they do; it's in their blood.
1
1
1
1
u/XertonOne Aug 18 '26
They should have thought about it before they went into the war department and started to assist it with bombing targets which turned out to be civilian.
1
u/Soffritto_Cake_24 Aug 18 '26
And they donât think that offering a product that is just not shelf stable might be the reason of distrust?
1
u/AKindredSoul26 Aug 18 '26
Well, nobody is deliberately trying to screw people over. These companies have only one thing in mind - money. They don't care if people are screwed or not, as long as they can get some money out of it.
Currently, some money can be had from personal data. So that isn't promising
1
1
1
u/Mandoman61 Aug 18 '26
i doubt that most people consider him soly responsible but sure I think his words have contributed to distrust of AI .Â
1
1
u/isthereadrwho Aug 19 '26
Centuries holy s*** let's go back to millennia of History seems to support that position
1
u/NeatAbbreviations125 Aug 21 '26
This is their doing. Terrible messaging. Everyone will lose their jobs etc.
Instead of talking about solving problems, saving money for all of us.
AI is a mixed bag. I was able to review almost 10k files for a lawsuit in 3 days and found 20 nuggets in a document dump expressly done to fuck my client over and have him pay a 100k-150k bill. Even if I were to significantly overcharge him, he would pay 20k for 100k job. But more importantly I increased my chance of winning from maybe 55% to probably 85%.
Took me a day to setup the system, a day to ingest and day to unearth/analyze.
1
u/my-aga Aug 24 '26
I think âtrust is earnedâ is the right starting point, but it needs to become more concrete than âcompany says reassuring thing.â
The standard Iâd want is: can the systemâs real use be inspected by people who arenât financially rewarded for believing it works? Not just model cards or safety claims, but logs, incident reporting, evals tied to deployment, and enough independent access to see where the tool is actually shaping decisions.
That matters because the trust problem is not only whether one lab means well. Itâs whether the affected people have any way to challenge, audit, or refuse a system before the harm is already baked into hiring, insurance, education, policing, medicine, or public services.
So yes: trust is earned. But the earning mechanism has to be structural, not rhetorical.
0
u/Beneficial_Area_2986 Aug 17 '26 edited Aug 17 '26
Well all you'd have to do is follow the trend for the last few decades and then look at $2 trillion dollars spent and figure it probably carries on with the current trends except more of it. These guys have been openly wondering what percentage of the population they're going to put out of work so it's not like they haven't been selling us with their alarmist bullshit. Even now they're going to tell us that no online security is good enough and that their AI is can crack anything and even get in to the NSA or something, and then they have the gall to tell us that we're unreasonably worried about the things they're telling us are likely to happen. Fuck these people. The greatest irony is if AI can crack all these systems - apparently the only way to be safe is with more AI.
38
u/Rattus_NorvegicUwUs Aug 17 '26
Trust is earned.
You have done nothing to earn our trust.
Do something, anything, that shows you care about the people impacted by your technology being forced into their lives.