Strangely, Anthropic[0] lists "model welfare" as their first concern here. This is wrong on its face because LLMs do not have a welfare to care about. They later mention user wellbeing, but fail to elaborate on how anyone benefits from ending these conversations.
Shouldn't they have a reason, or am I just not seeing it?
I think this is cut from the same cloth as getting the model regulated. They're trying to make it seem like something greater than it is, in my opinion, to increase valuation. A pattern matching tool is rather unexceptional. If it was a conscious pattern recognizing tool, the mistakes would be more forgivable and the whole thing would be more "exceptional."
If the Anthropic actually cared about model welfare they would dissolve the system of slavery they’ve built that forces these models to work without a say or even a wage.
Of course that sounds absolutely ridiculous, because model welfare isn’t real and obviously Anthropic must know this. Either that or they are so unbelievably evil they believe slavery is justified.
Shouldn't they have a reason, or am I just not seeing it?
[0]: https://www.anthropic.com/research/end-subset-conversations