Latest news with #DarioAmodei
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Dario Amodei says Anthropic hasn't been hit as hard as rivals in the AI talent wars — and it boils down to 2 things
Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei says he's not sweating Meta's massive offers to lure away top talent. Amodei says Anthropic, which did see at least one employee poached, is faring well "relative to other companies." Belief in Anthropic's long-term equity, Amodei said, is helping convince his employees to stay put. Meta needs to work harder if it wants to make Anthropic sweat the AI talent wars — at least, that's what CEO Dario Amodei is saying. Amodei said that Anthropic is generally faring better than the competition amid Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg's efforts to poach top talent from rivals, with reported pay packages as high as $100 million. "You can see publicly the list of people who went to the Meta Superintelligence Lab," Amodei recently told Stripe cofounder John Collison on Collison's "Cheeky Pint" podcast. "Even if you normalize for our size," he said, "many turned them down." "I think relative to other companies, we've done well. We may even have been relatively advantaged," the Anthropic CEO added. Amodei said that his employees are largely choosing to stay due to a mixture of loyalty and the potential financial upside. "It's like a mixture of true belief in the mission and belief in the upside of the equity," Amodei said. "I think Anthropic has developed a reputation for doing what it says it will do, in some cases making less promises, but keeping those promises that we make." Anthropic hasn't emerged unscathed from the AI talent wars. Meta successfully hired away at least one high-profile Anthropic employee, Joel Pobar, who worked on inference and previously spent 11 years at Meta. Zuckerberg also poached Shengjia Zhao, a co-creator of ChatGPT and former lead scientist at OpenAI, and hired Scale AI founder Alexandr Wang, to lead Meta's SuperIntelligence group. Amodei recently said that some of his employees "wouldn't even talk to Mark Zuckerberg." Some recent hiring and retention data sheds more insight into Anthropic's evolving head count. Venture firm SignalFire found that Anthropic is hiring engineers around 2.68 times as fast as it is losing them, The Wall Street Journal reported, with a higher rate of hiring new engineers than losing them compared to OpenAI, Meta, and Google. Anthropic was founded in 2021 by seven former OpenAI employees, including Amodei, who shared the belief that AI had the potential for both ill and good. In 2023, the company published a 22-page document focused on growing AI responsibly. Amodei has been outspoken about the need for society to prepare for what he predicts will be massive white collar job losses in the near future as a result of AI advances — a view that other CEOs, including OpenAI's Sam Altman and Nvidia's Jensen Huang, have pushed back on. Anthropic is often viewed as an AI safety-focused company, but its leader sees its mission as broader. "I more want Anthropic to be a company where everyone is thinking about the public purpose, rather than a one-issue company that's focused on AI safety or the misalignment of AI systems," Amodei told Time in 2024. "Internally, I think we've succeeded at that, where we have people with a bunch of different perspectives, but what they share is a real commitment to the public purpose." Read the original article on Business Insider
Indian Express
5 days ago
- Business
- Indian Express
No jobs for young workers due to AI? Here's what Goldman Sachs data shows about unemployment trends
Artificial intelligence is taking jobs, especially from those just entering the workforce. According to data from Goldman Sachs, obtained by Business Insider, the investment firm noted that the tech sector's share of US employment, is now declining. In fact, Goldman Sachs noted that the tech sector's employment share peaked in November 2022, the same month ChatGPT was launched, but has been declining ever since. The unemployment rate for 20- to 30-year-olds in tech has risen by nearly 3 perc entage points since early 2024, more than four times the increase in the overall jobless rate. Goldman Sachs says the the spike in jobless rate is an indicator that AI is beginning to take over white-collar work in the entry-level jobs. The bank's Chief Economist, Jan Hatzius, estimated in the note that AI will replace 6 per cent to 7 per cent of all US workers within the next decade. However, he predicted that the unemployment rate would only grow by a 'manageable' 0.5 per cent due to AI, because affected workers would shift to other industries. Fears that artificial intelligence will cost people their jobs are already proving to be true. The impacts are already being felt, as many tech companies continue to trim their workforces. Industry leaders like Anthropic's Dario Amodei and Amazon's Andy Jassy have admitted that AI will replace humans in white-collar jobs. Many companies are cutting roles in content, operations, customer service, and Human Resources — functions where generative AI and agentic tools are increasingly capable. However, corporations continue to present these changes as moves toward 'efficiency,' despite maintaining healthy balance sheets. That being said, software engineers remain in high demand, with companies like Facebook parent Meta offering multimillion-dollar pay packages. LinkedIn found that 'AI engineer' is the fastest-growing job title among recent college graduates, with two related roles: data center technician and systems engineer coming in at No 3 and 4. In India, however, the impact of AI on jobs is less severe compared to what is happening in the U.S. More and more companies are expanding their presence in India and opening new offices.
Axios
5 days ago
- Entertainment
- Axios
"Clankers": A robot slur emerges to express disdain for AI's takeover
AI is everywhere whether you like it or not, and some online have turned to a choice word to express their frustration. Why it matters: Referring to an AI bot as a "clanker" (or a "wireback," or a "cogsucker") has emerged as a niche, irreverent internet phenomenon that illuminates a broader disdain for the way AI is overtaking technology, labor, and culture. State of play: The concerns range from major to minor: people are concerned that AI will put them out of a job, but they're also annoyed that it's getting harder to reach a human being at their mobile carrier. "When u call customer service and a clanker picks up" one X post from July reads, with over 200,000 likes, alongside a photo of someone removing their headset in resignation. "Genuinely needed urgent bank customer service and a clanker picked up," reads another from July 30. Here's what to know: Where "clanker" comes from Context: The word is onomatopoeic, but the term can be traced back to Star Wars. It comes from a 2005 Star Wars video game, "Republic Commando," according to Know Your Meme. The term was also used in 2008's Star Wars: The Clone Wars: "Okay, clankers," one character says. "Eat lasers." Robot-specific insults are a common trope in science fiction. In the TV Show Battlestar Galactica, characters refer to the robots as "toasters" and "chrome jobs." "Slang is moving so fast now that a [Large Language Model] trained on everything that happened before... is not going to have immediate access to how people are using a particular word now," Nicole Holliday, associate professor of linguistics at UC Berkeley, told Rolling Stone. "Humans [on] Urban Dictionary are always going to win." How people feel about AI Anxiety over AI's potential impact on the workforce is especially strong. By the numbers: U.S. adults' concerns over AI have grown since 2021, according to Pew Research Center, and 51% of them say that they're more concerned than excited about the technology. Only 23% of adults said that AI will have a very or somewhat positive impact on how people do their jobs over the next 20 years. And those anxieties aren't unfounded. AI could wipe out half of all entry-level white-collar jobs — and spike unemployment to 10-20% in the next one to five years, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei told Axios in May. And the next job market downturn — whether it's already underway or still years off — might be a bloodbath for millions of workers whose jobs can be supplanted by AI, Axios' Neil Irwin wrote on Wednesday. People may have pressing concerns about their jobs or mental health, but their annoyances with AI also extend to the mundane, like customer service, Google searches, or dating apps. Social media users have described dating app interactions where they suspect the other party is using AI to write responses. There are a number of apps solely dedicated, in fact, to creating images and prompts for dating apps. Yes, but: Hundreds of millions of people across the world are using ChatGPT every day, its parent company reports. What we're watching: Sens. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) and Jim Justice (R-WV) introduced a bipartisan bill last month to ensure that people can speak to a human being when contacting U.S. call centers. "Slur" might not be the right word for what's happening People on the internet who want a word to channel their AI frustrations are clear about the s-word. The inclination to "slur" has clear, cathartic appeal, lexical semantician Geoffrey Nunberg wrote in his 2018 article "The Social Life of Slurs." But any jab at AI is probably better classified as "derogatory." "['Slur'] is both more specific and more value-laden than a term like "derogative," Nunberg writes, adding that a derogative word "qualifies as a slur only when it disparages people on the basis of properties such as race, religion, ethnic or geographical origin, gender, sexual orientation or sometimes political ideology." "Sailing enthusiasts deprecate the owners of motor craft as 'stinkpotters,' but we probably wouldn't call the word a slur—though the right-wingers' derogation of environmentalists as 'tree-huggers' might qualify, since that antipathy has a partisan cast."
Yahoo
04-08-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei says his employees are refusing Zuckerberg's $100 million payout—and he's not even matching salaries to keep them
Anthropic billionaire CEO Dario Amodei says many of his employees are turning down Meta's $100 million poaching offers, adding they 'wouldn't even talk to Mark Zuckerberg.' And the tech titan isn't willing to fight fire with fire by raising his own star staffers' salaries to convince them to stay at the $61.5 billion AI company, saying it's 'unfair' and could hurt company culture. Amodei and other Silicon Valley CEOs, including Sam Altman, have criticized Meta's strategy as being a killer for company culture. Tech companies like Meta and Google have waged an all-out talent war in the fight to build the next revolutionary AI—but Anthropic's stars aren't being won over by the promise of $100 million pay packages. 'Relative to other companies, a lot fewer people from Anthropic have been caught by these. And it's not for lack of trying,' Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei recently revealed on the Big Technology Podcast. 'I've talked to plenty of people who got these offers at Anthropic and who just turned them down. Who wouldn't even talk to Mark Zuckerberg.' Meta's been on a tear to dominate AI—and if it can't grow the talent internally, its CEO Zuckerberg has no qualms about buying it instead. In June, reports revealed that he's been poaching staff at competitor companies (including OpenAI, Google, and Anthropic) with $100 million signing bonuses, in an effort to beef up his 'superintelligence' AI lab. Some have taken up his envy-inducing offer, including at least seven staffers from OpenAI, but Amodei insisted that most of his employees haven't taken the bait—and he's not throwing money at staff to keep them. Why Anthropic's CEO won't use cash to convince workers to stay Employers may be tempted to fight fire with fire by raising their AI stars' salaries or recruiting others in return—but Anthropic thinks it would hurt its company culture. 'We are not willing to compromise our compensation principles, our principles of fairness, to respond individually to these offers,' Amodei said. 'The way things work at Anthropic is there's a series of levels. One candidate comes in, they get assigned a level, and we don't negotiate that level, because we think it's unfair. We want to have a systematic way.' Amodei not only thinks that it's unfair to raise salaries to have his workers stick around, but that it could actually backfire on his billion-dollar company's mission. In actuality, staying true to his compensation practices amid the poaching chaos has been a win for Anthropic's culture. 'I think actually this was a unifying moment for the company where we didn't give in. We refused to compromise our principles, because we had the confidence that people are Anthropic because they truly believe in the mission,' Amodei continued. 'The only way you can really be hurt by this is if you allow it to destroy the culture of your company by panicking, by treating people unfairly, in an attempt to defend the company.' Fortune has reached out to Anthropic and Meta for comment. Amodei's criticism of Zuckerberg's $100 million poaching strategy Zuckerberg's aggressive poaching strategy has ruffled some feathers in the AI world. Being scooped up with a $100 million pay package is a dream for most, but the Anthropic CEO has called out the practice for being fundamentally unfair. 'If Mark Zuckerberg throws a dart at a dart board and hits your name, that doesn't mean that you should be paid 10 times more than the guy next to you who's just as skilled, who's just as talented,' Amodei said on the podcast. Plus, Amodei thinks the hiring strategy is flat-out counterproductive to what Meta wants to get done. The CEO is proud of his staffers for not giving in to the $100 million offer—and that same loyalty isn't something that can be bought. And other AI talent seem to want in on Amodei's culture; engineers at OpenAI were eight times more likely to leave the company for Anthropic. The company also has an 80% retention rate for employees hired over the last two years, compared to 78% at Google DeepMind, and 67% at OpenAI. Ironically, Meta is trailing behind at 64%. Having employees who can do revolutionary work is one thing, but having a culture that makes them want to stay is another. By poaching others, Amodei doubts Meta is recruiting the best fits for its mission. 'I think that what they are doing is trying to buy something that cannot be bought: and that is alignment with the mission. I think there are selection effects here,' he said. 'Are they getting the people who are most enthusiastic, who are most mission aligned, who are most excited?' Other tech leaders, including OpenAI's Sam Altman, have echoed Amodei's criticism. Altman said that while Meta has managed to poach some staffers, 'so far none of our best people have decided to take them up on that.' Even though Zuckerberg has snatched some of his AI workers, Altman is doubtful that his competitor will be able to replicate the same success of OpenAI. 'I think that there's a lot of people, and Meta will be a new one, that are saying 'We're just going to try to copy OpenAI,'' Altman said on the Uncapped podcast last month. 'That basically never works. You're always going to where your competitor was, and you don't build up a culture of learning what it's like to innovate.' This story was originally featured on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Forbes
04-08-2025
- Business
- Forbes
Myth Or Reality: Will AI Replace Computer Programmers?
Have computer programmers innovated themselves out of a job? That's the fear driving theories that AI will remove the need for humans who can write computer code. Today's most sophisticated large language models like GPT-4o and Claude Sonnet are just as fantastically efficient at coding as they are at drafting emails and essays in human languages. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei recently said he believes AI will soon be writing 90 percent of all code. And Amazon CEO and President Andy Jassy said his company will hire fewer software engineers thanks to AI. So does this mean that learning to program—since the start of the computer age, an accessible gateway to a lucrative career for many—is pointless now? Regardless of the capabilities of today's AI, is there any way that someone setting out to learn software development now can hope to be able to compete with the AI coders of five years in the future? With 30 percent of coders saying they believe that AI will replace them, there's fear and uncertainty in the air, but how does this affect the reality of the situation? Let's take a look: Why Are Programmers Worried They Will Be Replaced? Evidence certainly seems to be growing that generative AI tools can carry out many of the tasks associated with coding and programming. Commonly cited use cases include creating new code, optimizing existing code, detecting bugs, explaining code, maintaining documentation and detecting security vulnerabilities. Although quantitative research is limited at this point, one study found that programmers assisted by Microsoft's AI coding assistant, GitHub Copilot, have been able to complete tasks 55 percent faster than those without. It's frequently speculated that entry-level programming roles are the most likely to be affected because their work is more easily automated. Senior roles such as team leaders and lead engineers, requiring a broader skillset and the ability to deal with strategic challenges, may be less exposed. But there's still the question of where the next generation of human software development leadership will come from if there are no jobs for beginners! According to the Washington Post, computer programmer jobs have declined by almost 30% compared to the previous two years. It's important to note that this isn't reflected in the figures for software development as a whole, which has declined by only around 3%. Jobs with the title of "programmer", however, are more likely to be entry-level roles that can more easily be replaced by automation. This does point towards the possibility of major shifts in the labor landscape. But it also gives anyone who programs computers for a living useful clues about what they need to do to stay relevant. Evolving Roles The truth is that the role of the programmer, in line with just about every other professional role, will change. Routine, low-level tasks such as customizing boilerplate code and checking for coding errors will increasingly be done by machines. But that doesn't mean basic coding skills won't still be important. Even if humans are using AI to create code, it's critical that we can understand it and step in when it makes mistakes or does something dangerous. This shows that humans with coding skills will still be needed to meet the requirement of having a 'human-in-the-loop'. This is essential for safe and ethical AI, even if its use is restricted to very basic tasks. This means entry-level coding jobs don't vanish, but instead transition into roles where the ability to automate routine work and augment our skills with AI becomes the bigger factor in the success or failure of a newbie programmer. Alongside this, entirely new development roles will also emerge, including AI project management, specialists in connecting AI and legacy infrastructure, prompt engineers and model trainers. We're also seeing the emergence of entirely new methods of developing software, using generative AI prompts alone. Recently, this has been named "vibe coding" because of the perceived lack of stress and technical complexity in relation to traditional coding. In truth, these are really just new methodologies that require developers to focus on more strategic tasks like project management and program architecture, rather than the nuts and bolts of getting code to do what we want it to do. The term is sometimes used by traditional coders in a derogatory way to imply that those coding with AI are scared of getting their hands dirty with 'real' coding. However, the practice also serves as an indicator of how software development is likely to change, and what skills coders and engineers should be developing now if they want to remain relevant. A glimpse of one potential future is provided in this quote from Adjrej Karpathy, director of AI at Tesla: 'A large portion of programmers of tomorrow do not maintain complex software repositories, write intricate programs, or analyze their running times. They collect, clean, manipulate, label, analyze and visualize data that feed neural networks.' Myth Or Reality? Software development and programming jobs are not going to disappear, in the short term at least. But the role will change immeasurably, and there are firm clues in place as to the direction of that change. What's the key learning here? I'd say it's that the ability to learn new skills and continuously stay ahead of change is the one skill everyone involved in programming, software engineering and development needs to develop if they don't want to be left behind. Creativity, innovation and real-world problem-solving skills are vital to ensuring AI can be used to improve people's lives. While I believe emerging and future generations of AI technology will deliver wonders, humans will still be at the heart of the process. Partly this is down to the ethical responsibility to ensure there is always human oversight. But also because it will be some time (if ever) before AI has the strategy-focused, people-centric skills needed to replace programmers.
