DARIO AMODEI, I genuinely do not understand this.
You go before the United Nations warning the world about what increasingly powerful AI could do to humanity, including the risks around biology, and calling for governments to regulate it.
Then, on the very same day, Anthropic announces its own biology research group and laboratory, using Claude to accelerate biological discovery.
How do you reconcile those two positions?
You are asking the world to put boundaries around this technology while your own company keeps pushing that same technology deeper into increasingly powerful areas.
Do the rules you are asking governments to create apply equally to Anthropic?
Because that is the part I cannot understand.
You cannot repeatedly tell the public, “This technology could become extraordinarily dangerous. We need rules, safeguards and oversight,” while simultaneously racing to expand what your own models can do.
And then when those systems discover something new, the answer cannot simply be: we found something interesting, and now we need to understand what it can do.
This is exactly why people are questioning the integrity of the message.
If the risks are as serious as you say they are, then the companies building these systems should be the first to demonstrate the restraint they are asking from everyone else.
Otherwise, people are going to ask the obvious question:
Are these rules meant to govern AI — or only everyone else’s AI?
Anthropic's CEO Dario Amodei warned the UN that AI could be used to make bioweapons. The same day, Anthropic announced a biology lab for its AI.
Dario Amodei told the UN Security Council that AI could be a danger to all of humanity. He said in one or two years, maybe less, AI could be like a country full of geniuses. And he named bioweapons as one of the biggest risks.
It all sounds nice. But this is my question to him.
You're worried AI could be a disaster, yet you're building a lab for the same AI you're warning the world about.
Are we supposed to trust you? Or are you saying you're the only sane person who can put AI to work on biology?
The easiest way AI could wipe out humanity is through a bio lab. You named bioweapons as a top risk yourself. By your own words, this AI is advanced and dangerous. And now you're giving it the tool it would need.
What are you playing at?