Daniela Amodei said she thinks some of "our employees" identify as effective altruists, which she said means they are especially worried about the potential for long-term harms from AI.
Mostly true True in substance, wrong in a detail.
Factual: Statements about the present or the past, checked against the record: did they hold up?
Said for an organisation they lead or work for; it counts on both records.
What would count as true or false
Judge the substance of the quote as of 2022-03-04. True: evidence shows that some Anthropic employees at that time identified as effective altruists and that effective altruism is commonly associated with heightened concern about long-term or existential harms from AI. Mostly true: EA ties are documented for some staff, but the description of EA is a somewhat simplified characterization. Mixed: EA affiliation is documented only for founders or investors, with weak evidence for employees. Mostly false: EA links are only indirect, such as funding sources, and not staff self-identification. False: evidence shows no Anthropic employees identified as effective altruists.
Set before the research began.
Evidence (2)
-
E1 The $1 billion gamble to ensure AI doesn’t destroy humanity Vox (Future Perfect) · 17 July 2023
“The philosophy and social movement, fomented by Oxford philosophers and Bay Area rationalists who attempt to work out the most cost-effective ways to further “the good,” is heavily represented on staff.”
-
E2 The $1 billion gamble to ensure AI doesn’t destroy humanity Vox (Future Perfect) · 17 July 2023
“at OpenAI and Anthropic, EA-aligned staffers actually build advanced AIs.”
Reasoning
An independent Vox report (E1) says effective altruism is 'heavily represented on staff' at Anthropic. E2 refers to 'EA-aligned staffers' who build advanced AIs at Anthropic, which supports the claim that some employees identify with EA. The evidence dates from July 2023 rather than March 2022, and the quotes do not directly confirm that EA is tied to heightened concern about long-term AI harms. The verdict is therefore mostly true rather than fully true.
Cite this claim
Daniela Amodei, “Daniela Amodei said she thinks some of "our employees" identify as effective altruists, which she said means they are especially worried about the potential for long-term harms from AI.” (said 4 March 2022). Verdict: mostly true. Reliability API, claim c_057124e3e981, method 0.1.0+28da144b, dataset release v1.1.2. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_057124e3e981
This claim is in dataset release v1.1.2, with the same verdict.
Reply to this claim
More factual claims by Daniela Amodei
-
Mostly false
“This was an immovable baseline established from day one.”
-
Mostly true
“In the lab, Claude designed new protein binders from scratch.”
In laboratory work, Anthropic's Claude designed new protein binders from scratch.
-
Mostly true
“including open-source code much of the internet runs on, before attackers could exploit them.”
-
Mostly true
“It’s an early step in drug design that usually takes a specialist weeks or months per target.”
-
Resolved true
“They also showed that more than 6,000 women had come in for prenatal care, but only 1,762 had delivered with a healthcare worker present, a discrepancy that the team is investigating and addressing.”
Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts are made.