What’s the evidence that this document is real / written by Anthropic?
This sentence seems particularly concerning:
We believe the first two issues can be addressed by focusing on deterrence rather than pre-harm enforcement: instead of deciding what measures companies should take to prevent catastrophes (which are still hypothetical and where the ecosystem is still iterating to determine best practices), focus the bill on holding companies responsible for causing actual catastrophes.
The public link is from the San Francisco Chronicle, which is also visible in the metadata on the page citing the letter as “Contributed by San Francisco Chronicle (Hearst Newspapers)”.
I don’t know the full chain of provenance for the document, given how I received it (linked by someone in a Slack server), but I don’t have any specific reason to think it’s fake. Seems like a lot of effort to go through for not much obvious gain. But it does seem worth keeping that hypothesis in mind, or similar (i.e. it is Anthropic’s letter but it was modified by 3rd parties before being published), absent an explicit confirmation or denial.
I didn’t catch this thing was not from an official anthropic doc. I think you should add something to the title or the first paragraph to clarify this, e.g., “Re: Anthropic’s suggested SB-1047 amendments (unofficial)”
It’s a letter written to a California legislator by Anthropic’s state & local policy lead, on behalf on Anthropic, so I don’t think it’s “unofficial”. “Unconfirmed”, maybe? I am not currently in sufficient doubt that the letter is real to put that in the title, but I’ll add it to the top of the post.
What’s the evidence that this document is real / written by Anthropic?
This sentence seems particularly concerning:
Axios first reported on the letter, quoting from it but not sharing it directly:
https://www.axios.com/2024/07/25/exclusive-anthropic-weighs-in-on-california-ai-bill
The public link is from the San Francisco Chronicle, which is also visible in the metadata on the page citing the letter as “Contributed by San Francisco Chronicle (Hearst Newspapers)”.
https://www.sfchronicle.com/tech/article/wiener-defends-ai-bill-tech-industry-criticism-19596494.php
It’s real.
I don’t know the full chain of provenance for the document, given how I received it (linked by someone in a Slack server), but I don’t have any specific reason to think it’s fake. Seems like a lot of effort to go through for not much obvious gain. But it does seem worth keeping that hypothesis in mind, or similar (i.e. it is Anthropic’s letter but it was modified by 3rd parties before being published), absent an explicit confirmation or denial.
I didn’t catch this thing was not from an official anthropic doc. I think you should add something to the title or the first paragraph to clarify this, e.g., “Re: Anthropic’s suggested SB-1047 amendments (unofficial)”
It’s a letter written to a California legislator by Anthropic’s state & local policy lead, on behalf on Anthropic, so I don’t think it’s “unofficial”. “Unconfirmed”, maybe? I am not currently in sufficient doubt that the letter is real to put that in the title, but I’ll add it to the top of the post.