Anthropic wants to help regulators write the regulations that Anthropic and its competitors must comply with. That gives an AI company the opportunity to shape legislation in its own commercial interests while presenting itself as an authority on AI safety. 🛎️ This was predicted. AI companies have enormous financial incentives to influence the regulations governing their actions. Their public statements aren’t independent safety advice. They’re corporate communications designed to influence governments, regulators and public opinion. This should help demonstrate why journalists need to stop repeating everything AI companies say as though it’s objective technical advice. They should investigate who’s making claims, what they stand to gain and if there’s evidence supports them. Otherwise, they’re simply amplifying a PR campaign created by tech companies they’re supposed to hold accountable. Can anyone old enough to remember TechCrunch or WIRED in their heyday imagine either publication simply repeating what tech companies said without challenging their claims? Assume everything AI companies say is self-serving and designed to manipulate markets for their own financial gain. These are not companies building technology for the betterment of humanity. AI is incredible and can do extraordinary things when used properly. But don’t confuse good technology with good people.