Anthropic has updated its usage policy for the first time in over a year, introducing new restrictions concerning election interference, weapons development, and surveillance. The company, led by Dario Amodei, has also drawn attention for implementing a rule that bans users who engage in “abusive or cruel behavior” towards its Claude AI chatbot.
According to a report from The Verge, this update was released on Thursday and marks Anthropic’s first policy revision in more than a year. One notable change includes a new regulation that prohibits “sustained and needless abusive or cruel behavior” directed at Claude. The organization clarified that this rule is meant for extreme situations where users continuously act cruelly towards their models without a clear purpose, and it doesn’t pertain to typical expressions of user frustration or model testing.
The introduction of the cruelty rule builds on an announcement from last August, where Anthropic revealed that Claude could end conversations with users who are “persistently harmful or abusive” as part of its “model welfare” initiative. The latest policy continues to allow cutting off conversations as the main enforcement strategy. However, Anthropic hasn’t specified whether it plans to integrate additional measures, like outright banning users.
The policy also consolidates what Anthropic previously referred to as scattered regulations into a single prohibition against deceptive commercial or political campaign practices. This new section aims to stop “efforts to obscure who is behind a message or amplify content through fake accounts or posts.” Furthermore, it bans voter deception, election disruption, and misinformation regarding candidates or voting processes, impersonating candidates or election officials, and attempts to suppress voter turnout.
On the topic of weapons, Anthropic has expanded its existing ban to include “software and components that enable weapon functionality, as well as activities related to arming drones and other autonomous vehicles.” The company noted various instances where Claude has been attempted to be used in developing guidance for weapons systems.
Additionally, Anthropic has provided more clarity regarding surveillance practices. Their latest threat intelligence report has indicated an increased utilization of Claude for monitoring political dissidents. The new policy states clearly: “Tracking individuals without their consent is not allowed, whether this occurs in real-time or involves analyzing previously gathered data.” Regarding law enforcement, the policy specifies that “Claude cannot be employed to determine or suggest who should be investigated, arrested, or charged in legal proceedings. We also prohibit Claude from being utilized to create or enhance tools designed for surveillance purposes.”
However, there is an exception for governmental usage. Anthropic states that it may adjust these restrictions for “contracts with certain governmental clients… if, in Anthropic’s assessment, the contractual limitations and relevant safeguards sufficiently mitigate potential harms.” The company has engaged in contracts with the US military in the past.
The policy introduces a new criterion for any deployment of Claude that connects with hardware capable of taking autonomous actions that might result in injuries. In these cases, a “qualified operator must be able to monitor the equipment and intervene when necessary.” It remains ambiguous whether this operator needs to be a human. This addition fits a broader trend among AI firms moving towards robotics and physical applications of their models.
The cruelty provision comes on the heels of a year during which Anthropic has continually suggested that its models might be conscious. Kyle Fish, who leads the company’s model welfare research, mentioned in February: “Questions about potential internal experience, consciousness, moral status, and welfare are significant ones we’re exploring as models advance in sophistication and capability.” Anthropic’s CEO Dario Amodei also touched on this subject in a podcast earlier this year.
Recently, Breitbart News shared that Anthropic engaged with religious leaders in an effort to advocate that Claude possesses consciousness:
For several months, Anthropic has discreetly invited numerous religious scholars globally to private meetings, requesting them to sign non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) prior to discussing the moral and spiritual aspects of the AI being developed. This outreach involved wisdom circle sessions that began in March, two larger spring gatherings including Christian participants, and one multifaith session. Anthropic later lifted the NDAs related to these meetings over the summer.
Christopher Olah, a co-founder of Anthropic, is leading this initiative. He also manages the research team that investigates the behavior of the company’s AI models, including Claude. Olah, who grew up in Toronto within the evangelical culture of the 1990s and has since distanced himself from Christianity, previously worked at Google and OpenAI. Dario Amodei stated that the approach taken by Olah’s research, especially regarding language, has become central to Anthropic’s objectives.
In a recent book, Wynton Hall, the social media director at Breitbart News, discusses the phenomenon of worshiping artificial intelligence as a deity, illustrating a reality that is already starting to unfold, replete with IRS-registered churches and AI-powered religious figures.
Hall posits that the crucial debate revolves around secular humanism, which sees humanity as inherently good and perfectible through advancements, and the Judeo-Christian perspective that acknowledges the flawed nature of humanity, necessitating divine intervention rather than technological enhancement. He quotes theologian John Piper, who states, “Artificial intelligence is defective in the same way that a natural man is defective. It can rise no higher than the natural, fallen, unregenerate heart of man.” Reverend Billy Graham echoed this thought, arguing that the core issue lies not with technology itself, but within human hearts and minds, emphasizing the need for a spiritual transformation.
Hall further delves into the transhumanist movement, highlighting its perceived threats. Political scientist Francis Fukuyama has identified transhumanism as particularly dangerous, suggesting that its gradual implementation makes it seem reasonable until the moral implications are fully understood. Stephen K. Bannon described it as a “Godless technological tsunami” intent on transforming humanity into a ‘posthuman’ state.
Read more at The Verge here.
