> One applicant — who spoke to Axios on the condition of anonymity for fear of hurting future job opportunities — recalled being asked how they would feel if the company someday abandoned its AI ambitions for safety reasons, and that decision sent the stock to zero.
Is that a scoop? I thought that was a well known thing with Anthropic interview process. They were very transparent about it beforehand from what I remember.
On HN I’ve said things very critical of the company but that’s really not one of them, overall they had a pretty good (but intense and time consuming) interview process. I don’t understand the value of that article
It’s becoming trendy to hate on Anthropic these days but their AI security record speaks for itself for years. Every AI safety benchmark/paper I’ve seen since sonnet became viable placed them far ahead of all other providers - marketing ploy or not (ala Apple “privacy” focus) the company has always had as part of their DNA thus far.
This is good advice. And if you don’t want to spend too much time reading about EA, imagine for yourself the inner dialogue of someone struggling with the tension between wanting to get really, really rich at any cost, and also really, really wanting other people to cherish them as a heroic-level Good Person, and also (this part is crucial) not have to sully their hands doing any actual hands-on good directly.
The ideal runs close to the output of Bill Gates’ PR machine.
I think what's inconceivable is that anyone thinks that these kinds of questions really work. The intersection of high-skilled people that can work there with low-awareness people that can't navigate these questions in a "politically correct" (for lack of a better term) way must be near 0.
"Oh, of course I wouldn't mind stopping if we decide that something is too dangerous to pursue. I think the mere fact that we'd get close to knowing how to do it would satisfy my curiosity. Plus, if we'd be close to it, I'd probably take some time to spend with my loved ones, as the competition would likely be close as well."
It's not hard to see these kinds of questions as more than kabuki theatre. I'd put them in the same vein as those "do you intend to perform any terrorists acts while in our country" questions you get while travelling.
I hate these types of questions because they're not just selecting for people dedicated to the mission, they're also selecting for people who are convincing liars
Isn't mostly any question not directly verifiable subject to that?
At least the more questions you ask a liar to pin them down the easier it is to eventually notice them tripping up.
> One applicant — who spoke to Axios on the condition of anonymity for fear of hurting future job opportunities — recalled being asked how they would feel if the company someday abandoned its AI ambitions for safety reasons, and that decision sent the stock to zero.
Is that a scoop? I thought that was a well known thing with Anthropic interview process. They were very transparent about it beforehand from what I remember.
On HN I’ve said things very critical of the company but that’s really not one of them, overall they had a pretty good (but intense and time consuming) interview process. I don’t understand the value of that article
I wasn't aware this was known information, but had I not, I would have assumed this was some 4D PR manoeuvre.
It’s becoming trendy to hate on Anthropic these days but their AI security record speaks for itself for years. Every AI safety benchmark/paper I’ve seen since sonnet became viable placed them far ahead of all other providers - marketing ploy or not (ala Apple “privacy” focus) the company has always had as part of their DNA thus far.
"anonymity, for fear of hurting future job opportunities"
Ah yes, this screams morality. We're in good hands, folks!
The candidates should read up on effective altruism before applying to this company.
If you don’t know what that is, then you won’t understand why Anthropic are asking those sort of questions.
This is good advice. And if you don’t want to spend too much time reading about EA, imagine for yourself the inner dialogue of someone struggling with the tension between wanting to get really, really rich at any cost, and also really, really wanting other people to cherish them as a heroic-level Good Person, and also (this part is crucial) not have to sully their hands doing any actual hands-on good directly.
The ideal runs close to the output of Bill Gates’ PR machine.
Shame that machine didn't manage to erase Epstein's emails.
"Will you lie to get this job?"
Sounds like theyre actively hiring people to train the worst kind of AI
Is it that inconceivable to think that there are people who would be ok with stopping what they're doing when they realize it's harmful?
I think what's inconceivable is that anyone thinks that these kinds of questions really work. The intersection of high-skilled people that can work there with low-awareness people that can't navigate these questions in a "politically correct" (for lack of a better term) way must be near 0.
"Oh, of course I wouldn't mind stopping if we decide that something is too dangerous to pursue. I think the mere fact that we'd get close to knowing how to do it would satisfy my curiosity. Plus, if we'd be close to it, I'd probably take some time to spend with my loved ones, as the competition would likely be close as well."
It's not hard to see these kinds of questions as more than kabuki theatre. I'd put them in the same vein as those "do you intend to perform any terrorists acts while in our country" questions you get while travelling.
The question won't distinguish between both types of people, except for the bad liars.
I hate these types of questions because they're not just selecting for people dedicated to the mission, they're also selecting for people who are convincing liars
What’s the alternative? Selecting people without caring at all about their character?
Isn't mostly any question not directly verifiable subject to that? At least the more questions you ask a liar to pin them down the easier it is to eventually notice them tripping up.
Admit it HN, you have sour grapes for not having a job at Anthropic/OpenAI.
I have no clue how to get my resume past their Claude ATS so it's kind of moot.