> I think I'm just very much out of tune with the zeitgeist, because I can't imagine not going along with what's a polite request not to use AI.

No, what you are is ignoring the context.

This request comes from a company building, promoting, and selling the very thing they are asking you not to use.

Yes, asking you not to use AI is indeed a polite request. It is one you should respect. “The zeitgeist” has as much people in favour of AI as against it, and picking either camp doesn’t make anyone special. Either stance is bound to be detrimental in some companies and positive in others.

But none of that matters, what makes this relevant is the context of who’s asking.

I didn't miss that context, I understand who Anthropic are.

That may be true, but your first response still doesn't seem to account for that fact.

Why does the company that's asking change the analysis here? Shouldn't they know better than anyone the limitations of their product?

Are you implying that Anthropic specifically pushes for their models to be used inappropriately as long as they're not the victims of that inappropriate use? Because I haven't seen that at all with Anthropic, they've been consistently the most subdued and reserved AI company out there, barely marketing their products at all and when they do, doing so very carefully.

Your reactions in this thread are understandable as reactions against the oversaturation of AI, but it's not really fair to paint all of the companies with the same brush when Anthropic exists to be a foil to Altman's irresponsible push for saturation.

Id say that if a candidate can demonstrably 5x their performance with LLMs then I'd be keen to hire them.

By banning LLM usage I think Anthropic is just indirectly admitting that their assessments cant distinguish lameduck LLM reliance and genuine increases in productivity.

This is certainly their prerogative but it's still a pretty bad look - like banning calculators in a math exam.

Honesty is not something our modern societies optimize for, although I do wish things were different

It's not just the society, it's this particular company who optimizes for it.

> "Well it's not illegal"

What's good for the gander.... I promise you they will use AI to vet your application.

> I promise you they will use AI to vet your application.

So?

> What's good for the gander....

The ones paying are in their vast majority the most selfish of them all, for example it would be reasonable to say that Jeff Bezos its one of the most selfish people on the planet, so at the end it doesn't boil down to "Well I can cheat and get away with it, so therefore I should cheat" but more like "Well I can cheat, get away with it and the victim is just another cheater, so therefore I should cheat"

Two wrongs don’t make a right, and it seems weird to me you‘d want to work for such a most-selfish cheater in the first place.

Bezos, Musk, Zuckerberg and many many others do everything in their power to reduce costs including paying less taxes, which includes using tax havens and tax loopholes that they themselves make sure to keep open by "lobbying" politicians, so effectively to work in general means to work for mostly cheaters and there is no way to avoid it, sure you can stay unemployed and stay clean of the moral corruption that entails living in a capitalist system but many don't consider that an option; and is not like buying from them is any better morally speaking, for the exact same reasons.

>I'm with you, I'm very surprised by the amount arguments which boil down to, "Well I can cheat and get away with it, so therefore I should cheat".

Have you seen the job market? Companies will treat you like garbage through the interview process, make you jump through pointless hoops, and then even if you get the job you can be laid off at any moment because of arbitrary reasons the CEO made up to get their bonus.

Why should anyone be honest when it goes entirely unappreciated and unrewarded? I can completely understand why people would cheat. When companies stop treating workers like garbage then they deserve honesty.

> Why should anyone be honest when it goes entirely unappreciated and unrewarded?

This is a good example of the attitude that I'm describing.

Your question is close to an unthinkable culture shock to me.

In my values and ethics, honesty isn't transactional. It's not something you practice because you expect the same back. It's not something that you regulate and only provide to others that meet some moral bar that you set.

Honesty is just something you do because it's ethically right to do so.

( Nor by the way, is it motivated out of some fear of omnipotent reprisal. )

It depends on context. Imagine you're playing poker or some other game where being deceptive gives you an advantage. Do you tell the other poker players your hand because Honesty is the ethically right thing to do? You wouldn't win many games. On the other end of the spectrum are your dealings with your own friends and family. You're expected to be honest with them. I'm not going to try to place the job hunt anywhere particular on this spectrum, but surely it's somewhere in between.

When playing a game, honesty doesn't require you to announce your cards. But it would be considered dishonest to set up hidden cameras to see your opponent's cards.

>In my values and ethics, honesty isn't transactional. It's not something you practice because you expect the same back.

Nor in mine, I'd like to be honest 100% of the time. Unfortunately, we don't live in a perfect world, and practicing morality usually just opens you up to be exploited and stepped on. It doesn't mean you need to be a shitty person, but you also shouldn't be a doormat.

Bad people don't play by the rules. If the good people let them they will take over. The only solution is for everyone to break the rules.

What the parent poster saying boils down to "They have money so they deserve to be robbed." Funny to hear in an industry where most members get paid multiples of the median wage.

They sortof have a just world fallacy going on, a trap I often fall into. I wish it was.

I think you're more accurate here, fuck them. The reality is I'm fortunate to be an office drone instead of treated as utterly disposable in a gig economy. And if someday AI gets good enough to replace me, I will be replaced.

If "They" here meant me, then far from it. I certainly don't subscribe to the Just World fallacy.

If you're only honest or ethical when you think you'll get some good back from it, then you aren't being honest at all, you're just doing what is convenient, even if you believe any reward is deferred, possibly all the way to a future existence entirely.