ternwer

I was too cute in trying to be terse, but I meant a mess while using AI:

> [Employers], above, are more focused on the opposite side, though: engineers who try AI once, see a mess or hallucinations, and decide it's useless. There is some learning to figure out how to wield it.

Yes, I've seen many people become _too_ hands-off after an initial success with LLMs, and get bitten by not understanding the system.

Hirers, above, are more focused on the opposite side, though: engineers who try AI once, see a mess or hallucinations, and decide it's useless. There is some learning to figure out how to wield it.

I think most are looking for both.

AI/LLM knowledge without programming knowledge can make a mess.

Programming knowledge without AI/LLM knowledge can also make a mess.

HN often avoids politics, but they were some of the most upvoted stories recently:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47188697

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47189650

Motorola phones are Chinese, aren't they? They mention being a Lenovo company in the article.

How have they been hostile to open weight models and research? Just because they don't release models themselves?

Note that they are still releasing interesting research

Why? What has their PR department done? Most people are quite critical of a lot of their messaging, it's their actions that seem worth encouraging

Feel free to judge them by their actions rather than intentions. This situation being an example.

This effectively is cancelling, isn't it?

You're implying cancelling quietly would be better. But the department would just use a different supplier. This seems like the action someone would take if they cared about the issue.

I think he's more pragmatic than that.

So you think we should never support them doing something "positive"? What incentive does that give?

His actions seem pretty consistent with a belief that AI will be significant and societally-changing in the future. You can disagree with that belief but it's different to him being a liar.

The $200m is not the risk here. They threatened labelling Anthropic as a supply chain risk, which would be genuinely damaging.

> The DoW is the largest employer in America, and a staggering number of companies have random subsidiaries that do work for it.

> All of those companies would now have faced this compliance nightmare. [to not use Anthropic in any of their business or suppliers]

... which would impact Anthropic's primary customer base (businesses). Even for those not directly affected, it adds uncertainty in the brand.

As far as we can tell, OpenAI and Google seem to be ok with it and not resisting. It would be easier for Anthropic's cause if they did.