zlacker

[parent] [thread] 3 comments
1. mrdepe+(OP)[view] [source] 2026-02-04 20:15:51
I am a fairly cynical person. Anthropic could have made this statement at any time, but they chose to do it when OpenAI says they are going to start showing ads, so view it in that context. They are saying this to try to get people angry about ads to drop OpenAI and move to Anthropic. For them, not having ads supports their current objective.

When you accept the amount of investments that these companies have, you don't get to guide your company based on principles. Can you imagine someone in a boardroom saying, "Everyone, we can't do this. Sure it will make us a ton of money, but it's wrong!" Don't forget, OpenAI had a lot of public goodwill in the beginning as well. Whatever principles Dario Amodei has as an individual, I'm sure he can show us with his personal fortune.

Parsing it is all about intention. If someone drops coffee on your computer, should you be angry? It depends on if they did it on purpose, or it was an accident. When a company posts a statement that ads are incongruous to their mission, what is their intention behind the message?

replies(2): >>thinkl+To >>kviran+Hx
2. thinkl+To[view] [source] 2026-02-04 22:10:26
>>mrdepe+(OP)
Ideally, ethical buyers would cause the market to line up behind ethical products. For that to be possible, we have to have choices available to us. Seems to me Anthropic is making such a choice available to see if buyers will line up behind it.
replies(1): >>fogzen+4O
3. kviran+Hx[view] [source] 2026-02-04 22:58:35
>>mrdepe+(OP)
Wow. Well said.
◧◩
4. fogzen+4O[view] [source] [discussion] 2026-02-05 00:46:48
>>thinkl+To
“Ideally” is doing a lot of heavy lifting here.
[go to top]