I talked to my friend about all the things I do to ensure my personal assistant behaves reasonably. The prompt engineering, the fake site evals, everything. And then I have Opus 5.5 do it and it doesn’t need anything. It’s simply fully aligned to performance by default.
And what did I learn anyway. Going from one model to another changes what works. And you can simply learn everything from the Chinese model in days. The whole “building skill” thing is bogus.
I have this library of techniques, a scant few of which I’ve made available on my blog, and what is reality instead: the next model blows the need for the techniques into the dust. Back on level playing field.
It’s a false god, this cultivation. Waste of time. Use the best model you can. Once you hit the guardrails move out to the other models. Even Opus 4.8 is fine. If you legitimately want to dodge the guardrails use the -cyber models.
Then move on. The library is dust.
In real life they "just" want to capture the US economy, replace most workers with AI, become trillionaires, then control the world by making ClaudeGPT influence peoples opinions and write backdoors into code. And they need to get open models banned in the process.
The Chinese just want to make money and beat America. Mistral and BFL want to prove Europe can still innovate. They don't have evil goals so they're not evil people.
This was all fake then?
Yes. They sell to Palantir which does all the things Anthropic claims to disapprove of.
> We have offered to work directly with the Department of War on R&D to improve the reliability of these systems
"However, in a narrow set of cases, we believe AI can undermine, rather than defend, democratic values. .. Mass domestic surveillance. Fully autonomous weapons."
How many other companies said no to Trump in any way?
But the main reason I wanted to reply was just to say -- saying no to Trump, by itself, does not mean that one is not evil. Not all evil in the world is Trump's evil.