The Anthropic employee quoted in the article is doing a great job of saying things that no PR/communications department would ever, ever want an employee to say:

> Jacob is correct here—we really do earnestly believe AI could kill all humans! I personally think it is >10% within the next decade. I believe Anthropic is trying its best, but we do not yet have a plan to solve alignment for superintelligence and are not clearly on track to.

Anthropic's marketing department is so creative

> We at Gizmodo were gobsmacked by the sheer size of the reaction to Coxon’s not-at-all breaking news. As Coxon himself acknowledged, he wasn’t revealing any hidden secrets about the beliefs of AI’s industry leaders.

Are we supposed to be comforted by this?

This guy is part of an ai policy think tank. This is all staged.

“What are the odds that the first three quote tweets of Coxon’s post would all be major AI-restriction policy advocates funded generously by the same donor, who also happens to be one of the leading investors in, and a board member of, Anthropic, the company Coxon was resigning from? And all within 15 minutes of posting (two within ten)?”

https://x.com/parkerthayer/status/2097759699626328575

Kind of odd that I haven't seen him mentioned in any of these discussions. How does Ted Kaczynski fit into all of this?

  * He was correct
  * He was wrong
  * He was correct, but for the wrong reasons
  * He was correct, but too extreme 
  * He was correct, and not extreme enough
  * He was correct, but too early
  * He was correct, but unpleasant as a person 
  * I haven't read the manifesto, but I have strong opinions anyway
  * Ted who?

  * He wasn't wrong