Our readingWhat is a korrent?
Drawn from what Zvi Mowshowitz said
Mental modelIncentives
In the views onAnthropicunder our view: The lab's safety record is asserted from the inside and doubted from the outside On the topicHow dangerous is AI, and how soon?under our view: What matters is how the people building it behave, not what the machines want
I have long said that even Anthropic is not prioritizing safety, even to the extent that doing so would maximize their medium term (e.g. 3-12 months) business interests.
Added to korrents 2 Sept 2026 · How quotes work · Something wrong? Tell us
Do you hold this korrent?Do you also believe this?
I hold this tooIn tension with
Amodei reports that his company audits new models for deception before release. Mowshowitz says even Anthropic does not prioritise safety to the extent that doing so would maximise its own three-to-twelve-month business interests. Both can be true, and the gap between them is the whole question of whether a lab can be trusted to mark its own work.
In tension with
Confidence in safety, not capability, will increasingly set the pace of AI progress.
Altman says confidence in safety rather than capability will increasingly set the pace of progress. Mowshowitz says the labs, his own examples included, do not act as though safety were even in their medium-term commercial interest. One is a prediction about what will govern the pace; the other is a measurement of what governs it now.
Shared subject first, then similar wording. They may agree or disagree.