OpenAI engineers are 8 times as likely to join Anthropic than the reverse, a report says. Here's why.
The AI startup Anthropic is siphoning top talent from OpenAI and Google's DeepMind.
It's eight times as likely for an OpenAI engineer to join Anthropic than vice versa, according to a report from venture capital firm SignalFire published late last month, based on LinkedIn data. The trend was even more pronounced for DeepMind, Google's AI division, where the ratio was 11:1 in Anthropic's favor.
In a fierce war for AI talent, Anthropic's strong positioning on safety and technical chops, as well as its earlier-stage startup status, have all helped it snap up talent, the report said. It has poached top leaders, including two of OpenAI's cofounders. Anthropic itself was formed out of a group of former OpenAI employees.
Anthropic also has a strong retention rate, SignalFire found, with an 80% rate compared to OpenAI's 67%. DeepMind followed closely behind Anthropic with a 78% retention rate.
Both Anthropic and OpenAI are growing fast. Anthropic's careers page lists just over 200 positions, while OpenAI lists almost 330.
Safety first
Top OpenAI leaders have left for Anthropic in part because of its focus on AI safety.
For example, Jan Leike jumped ship from OpenAI in 2024. He co-led its superalignment team, which aims to keep future superintelligent AI systems "aligned" with human values. In an X post about his resignation, Leike said that OpenAI's "safety culture and processes have taken a backseat to shiny products." He now co-leads Anthropic's alignment team.
OpenAI cofounder John Schulman also resigned last year to join OpenAI, writing on X he wanted to "deepen" his focus on AI alignment.
Schulman has since left Anthropic to join ex-OpenAI CTO Mira Murati's startup, Thinking Machines. As Business Insider previously reported, Thinking Machines is seeking upwards of $2 billion for its seed round.
Schulman isn't the only OpenAI cofounder to have joined Anthropic. So did AI researcher Durk Kingma, who also worked for several years at DeepMind.
Anthropic has also poached several prominent DeepMind staff. It hired DeepMind senior staff research scientist Neil Housby to set up its new office in Zurich, as Housby revealed on X earlier this year.
Anthropic also hired research scientist Nicholas Carlini out of DeepMind this spring after he spent seven years working for Google. In his blog post, Carlini wrote that "the people at Anthropic actually care about the kinds of safety concerns I care about, and will let me work on them."
SignalFire also attributes the talent shift partly to Anthropic's AI assistant, Claude, gaining popularity among developers — though OpenAI's ChatGPT is a popular coding tool, too.
"Engineers often gravitate toward companies whose products they admire and use," the report says.
Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei predicted earlier this year that AI will soon generate 90% of the code developers are in charge of.
Early stage has its advantages
Anthropic's position as an earlier-stage company could also help. OpenAI, valued at $300 billion, has existed since 2015, while Anthropic, valued at $61.5 billion, was founded in 2021. And Google has long been a public company.
The prospect of getting early equity can be more enticing with an earlier-stage company like Anthropic, said Zuhayeer Musa, the cofounder of engineer compensation platform Levels.fyi.
"People may see much more future upside at Anthropic than joining OpenAI, even though growth is quite strong at both," Musa said.
Also, there may be fewer Anthropic veterans looking to switch in the first place, SignalFire's head of research, Asher Bantock, told Business Insider.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Tom's Guide
36 minutes ago
- Tom's Guide
This AI tool is like Perplexity, NotebookLM, and ChatGPT put together — here's why you need it
I don't know if you've noticed, but there are a lot of AI tools out there. An overwhelming number, some might say. So choosing the right option for you can be surprisingly challenging. Of course, there are the obvious options like ChatGPT, Gemini, or one of the other major AI brands, powered by billions in funding and massive supercomputers. However, that doesn't mean they are always the best option for what you need. For example, for students looking to get an edge on a research project, there are lots of other great options out there. After spending some time testing it, one of my new top picks is Logically. Logically, formerly known as Afforai, is an AI workspace. It can be used for both research and writing. In the Logically app or desktop system, you can have everything you need in one place. Start a new document, and you can set headings, write text, add bullet points, tables, images, code, and pretty much anything you would need to write a book, article, research paper, or essay. This alone is seen in countless places like Notion, Word or pretty much any other AI-powered writing software. Logically stands out by combining its writing technology with AI research tools in a few ways: Get instant access to breaking news, the hottest reviews, great deals and helpful tips. Chatbot functionality Much like NotebookLM, you can add research documents, papers, or links for the tool to comb through. Alternatively, through the built-in chatbot, you can ask questions using AI models like Gemini, GPT-4o, or Claude 3.5. This is paired with Google search functions to work in the same way as you might use ChatGPT or Gemini to research a project. Research like a scholar Equally, you can use a feature called Semantic Scholar. Instead of searching the web and the training data of whichever AI model you're using, it will comb through a database of 200 million peer-review research papers. In this mode, it will not only offer the research papers that best answer your question, but it will also offer the reference, the best quote from the paper and allow you to save your reference straight into a bibliography if needed. Document retrival Finally, if you have an exact list of research documents you want to use, a third tool will change the chatbot to only answer questions from your list of research sources. This will also provide citations and references for any information it provides you. Referencing is, quite frankly, a nightmare. Trying to remember where you found a quote, figure or concept can take forever if you don't note it down. Even if you do, there is then the formatting to make it correct for the document. Part of the benefit of Logically is that it does it all for you. Upload documents and links to your project and it will keep them all in one place. By doing this, you can search these documents using the in-built chatbot or just use them for referencing down the line. You can also add tags to different sources, keeping them all organised in different categories. With all of the incredible things AI can do right now, this is hardly ground-breaking. In a lot of ways, this is a tool that is simply taking the best of other AI systems and using them all in one place. But, that is what works so well. Why split your time between ChatGPT, NotebookLM and Perplexity, when you can have them all in one place. On top of all those research tools, youa also have your actual project in the same place too. For the occasional quick project, this isn't all that useful. But if you're in school, working towards a PhD or in a research role that requires you to be constantly deep into a project, Logically feels like it has nailed the formula.
Tom's Guide
3 hours ago
- Tom's Guide
I used every major AI assistant for one week — here's the one I'd actually keep using
I've written dozens of features about AI assistants. I've compared their features, broken down the latest updates and stress-tested prompts to determine the best ones. But to truly determine which one works best for me and my productivity, I had to use them exclusively one at a time without the temptation of jumping to you've been keeping up, you know how much I love prompt dusting, that is, using one chatbot and then entering the response into another chatbot to refine the results. But not this time. That was off limits for this particular one week, I ran a full-scale experiment. I rotated through ChatGPT (GPT-4o), Claude 4 Sonnet, Gemini 2.5 Pro, Perplexity and DeepSeek as my daily assistant. The only rule was I had to use each one exclusively for a full 24 hours, no switching mid-day. To ensure that I wouldn't cheat, I reluctantly logged out of every chatbot that I wasn't allowed to use. From researching why my dishwasher kept tripping and tips to help avoid toddler tantrums to planning meals and helping with my workflow, I put all of the assistants to the test to keep up with my chaotic life. And at the end of the week, only one of them felt like it could stay. ChatGPT offers Voice and Vision, which I use all the time for hands free assistance. When my son's soccer tournament got switched to a completely different park – while I was driving. I used the assistant to immediately figure out where I was supposed to be in ten minutes. The chatbot did not stumble and even told me to stay calm as I pulled over and searched for way I used ChatGPT on its designated day was summarizing text messages in a group chat of 15 very chatty moms. I needed to catch up fast so I took a few screenshots, uploaded them in the app and ChatGPT helped me get the gist of the conversaton without skipping a human-like element of ChatGPT, especially when it comes to life's craziest moments, is where this chatbot shines. I found the chatbot was faster and better at voice, image and memory tasks. It remembered my preferences when it came to planning meals for the day and even helped me brainstorm ideas for my father-in-law's birthday with surprising creativity. Where it shined: Memory and custom instructions made it feel personal Get instant access to breaking news, the hottest reviews, great deals and helpful tips. Great for brainstorming and creativity Solid image interpretation Ideal emotional support Where it lagged: Sometimes still too eager to please, less critical than I wanted Multimodal features work best in the app, not browser I'll admit, going from ChatGPT to Claude was tricky. Although it has a new voice feature, it's definitely not as good so I opted to keep the chats with text messages. Claude is alo thoughtful, sometimes to a fault. The chatbot gave me deeply reasoned answers and beautiful prose but it could get a bit ChatGPT where I feel like I'm chatting with a friend, Claude can sometimes feel like I'm talking to a philosophy major. The chatbot feels far less personal. It also cannot handle as many sporadic example, I was meeting a friend for dinner at a restaurant I hadn't been to before and Claude had a hard time giving me directions. I said it was next to a park and the assistant suggested I call the park ranger. Not assistant was helpful when I got an extremely long email from my literary agent that I didn't have time to read at the moment, but needed to respond to. It helped craft an email that I was able to send based on a summary of the unexpected win? Claude is great for emotional nuance. When I was struggling to word a delicate message, not professional, but something personal with a little emotional weight, Claude really delivered. Claude's responses weren't just grammatically clean, they were empathetic, balanced and thoughtful. If you ever need to write a message that's both clear and kind, Claude is surprisingly good at finding that it shined: Incredible at nuanced reasoning and long-term structure Calm, articulate tone Great with analysis and summarization Where it lagged: Less helpful for immediate questions like directions Voice feature not great Gemini is a tool I use all the time and I definitely missed it on my ChatGPT and Claude days. The chatbot is fast, visually aware and connected to Google's ecosystem — which helps keep me in check throughout the week. From searching for real-time info or pulling from Gmail and Docs, this is always my go-to bot. However, when it comes to creativity, Gemini can be a little bit Live was helpful when I realized the chicken I purchased for dinner was expired by two days. Was it okay to eat? It told me no and then made suggestions based on what it could see in my fridge and pantry. I ended up making some crispy chicken wraps for the family that were a big way Gemini helped was at bedtime when my kids were just not having it. If you're a parent with young kids, you know just how hard bedtime can be. All you want to do is go to bed and all the kids want is find any excuse not to. I turned on Gemini Live and asked for help. With one prompt of 'Help me get my kids to bed!' It came up with some really helpful tips including whispering (even though I wanted to scream) to help calm the kids that were practically bouncing off the walls. Where it shined: Fantastic for Google Workspace integration Excellent at organizing info and finding sources Strong math and chart-making skills Where it lagged: Creativity was underwhelming Occasionally hallucinated formatting or skipped nuance Perplexity is like a turbo-charged research intern. It gives real citations, fast summaries, and real-time web results. But it's not really a conversation partner — more like a search engine in a chatbot the model's designated day, I used it while drafting a story. I needed to double-check when a specific AI model launched. Perplexity pulled the date instantly — along with three sources I could actually click and verify. No hallucinations. Actually, I've never seen Perplexity hallucinate. Have you? Let me know in the comments. I'm really curious about this same day, I was looking for a small but powerful fan for my office now that summer has officially hit New Jersey and wanted to compare prices. Perplexity laid out side-by-side specs and recent reviews from trusted sites — all in under 30 seconds. It felt like skipping three Google tabs. I also used Perplexity to dive into the news and catch up on newsletters that I'd been saving for my Perplexity day. Wait, was that cheating? It pulled from current articles, summarized the key updates and gave me links to explore more if I wanted. Less noise, more clarity. Where it shined: Best for fast, factual, source-backed answers Great for staying up-to-date with news or product research Fast and efficient Where it lagged: Lacks tone, personality or memory Not ideal for brainstorming or big creative projects DeepSeek was the dark horse of the week. I usually use this one for all things creativity, so I was genuinely impressed with how the chatbot stepped up to the plate for AI assistance. While it's not as well-known or widely used, it is quickly showing it can compete with the big names like ChatGPT and Gemini. DeepSeek is incredibly capable when it comes to reasoning, coding and vision-based tasks. In fact, my first test was visual. I uploaded a photo of my daughter's field trip supply list (crumpled and slightly coffee-stained) and asked DeepSeek to organize it into a shopping checklist by store. Not only did it read the handwriting correctly, it suggested which items I could get from Amazon, Target or Walmart. And get this, it even gave me estimated prices. Later, I asked DeepSeek to help explain why my cat was coughing and sneezing excessively. It gave me a detailed but understandable breakdown of possible causes and even helped me find vets in the area (although we have one, it proved it was doing it's job as an assistant). I noticed that it wasn't as chatty as ChatGPT, but definitely 'friendly.' DeepSeek shines when you need serious problem-solving or tech-heavy tasks done fast. Where it shined: Exceptional vision analysis and image-based reasoning Strong logical thinking and technical explanations Great for coding, math, and structured planning Where it lagged: Limited personality or warmth in conversation Not ideal for emotional tone or open-ended brainstorming With the unpredictablity of each day, the whole 'you get what you get' test turned into a wild ride. But, after a week of controlled AI-assisstance, ChatGPT came out on top with Gemini Live as a very close second. ChatGPT isn't perfect, but the memory aspect of this chatbot is a huge asset for me. It knows me best, so I don't have to repeat myself. With memory enabled and custom instructions dialed in, it was the only one that felt like it was adapting to me — not the other way around. This chatbot strikes the best balance between creativity, utiliy and usability. It also just feels the most like a true assistant. It knew my tone. It anticipated my needs. It helped me work and think better. That said, I have found that using them all in a hybrid way is the best way. I'll always keep Claude around for deep dives and Perplexity for quick research. Gemini is intertwined in my workflow so there's no way that one is going line: I'm glad I don't have to make a choice.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Nvidia's research boss claims the company's Chinese AI researchers are now writing programs for Huawei instead and is blaming the US chip exports
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. Nvidia's been banging the drum against the United State's China chip export restrictions for a while now, but while it had previously highlighted this in broad terms, the company now seems to be getting more direct with its claims. According to a machine translation of a report from Taiwan Economic Daily (via Wccftech), Nvidia's chief scientist and senior VP of research, Bill Dally, claims that Huawei is scooping up ex-Nvidia AI researchers as a result of the restrictions. According to Dally, admittedly via a machine translation, the growth in the number of AI researchers working in China—apparently growing from a third of the world's researchers in 2019 to almost half of them today—has been forced by the US export restrictions. The idea is that without these restrictions, Huawei wouldn't be forced to lean so strongly into home-grown AI solutions, but now it must do so to keep up. Nvidia is clearly keen on presenting this argument (probably in hopes that the US administration specifically will hear it) to show that there are arguable downsides of banning its exports to China for the US. It certainly appeals to the ears of those concerned about the US-China technological arms race. As I said, though, the general argument isn't new—Nvidia has been touting it for a while. At Computex last month, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang said: "AI researchers are still doing AI research in China" and "if they don't have enough Nvidia, they will use their own [chips]." And regarding Huawei specifically, Huang said the company has become "quite formidable". There is, of course, another reason other than US national interest that might make Nvidia keen to highlight possible negatives of export controls. Namely, the fact that these restrictions have cost and will cost the company lots of money. Nvidia itself has confirmed this, stating that after billions of dollars lost through restrictions of its H20 chips to China in Q1, it's expecting another $8 billion to be lost for the same reason in Q2. That's because Hopper, the company's previous chip architecture, "is no longer an option", according to the CEO. Huawei's latest Ascend 910 and 920 chips, courtesy of China's SMIC (Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation), will probably now be better options for Chinese AI companies than trying to get hands on Nvidia silicon somehow. And with ex-Nvidia researchers now apparently padding out the Chinese industry, who knows what will be cooked up next and when. Nvidia certainly seems to be presenting itself as worried about what's to come. The company can't complain about the vaguely 'poachy' aspect of this, though, really—not when Nvidia seems to be enticing likely TSMC employees in Taiwan with high salary job advertisements. Sometimes business is just business, you know? Best gaming PC: The top pre-built gaming laptop: Great devices for mobile gaming. Melden Sie sich an, um Ihr Portfolio aufzurufen.
