Content changes
This page records material published corrections and explains whether a change reflects new evidence or a revised interpretation. A changed coordinate alone does not establish that someone changed their mind. Read the method.
Current edition: 0.22.0. Evidence cutoff: 2026-09-16.
Daniel Card: direct article and map search
Added a directly retrieved PwnDefend article to distinguish available original commentary from the supplied X copies. Map searches now expose matching profiles without a position. Card remains unplaced: the reviewed material does not establish both axes. No ideology label or coordinate has been inferred.
If it’s so powerful, it’s a shame you didn’t use it for defense design · Supplied export of an X post endorsing AI opportunities and security collaboration (editorial description) · Supplied export of an X reply on software design, opportunities and risks (editorial description)
LeCun: newer context, unchanged map position
Added 2026 material on research openness, warnings about actions and consequences, and his current role. The two-axis placement still rests on the 2024 interview. Coordinates and ranges are unchanged; this update does not establish a change in his views.
Yann LeCun: Meta AI, Open Source, Limits of LLMs, AGI & the Future of AI, transcript #416 · Learning Abstractions: A Conversation with Yann LeCun · In lecture at Brown, Yann LeCun discusses a new approach to AI
a16z: personal advocacy does not establish a firm position
The earlier map placed Andreessen Horowitz from Marc Andreessen’s manifesto, scoped as platform advocacy. The essay’s footer attributes the views to individual personnel and excludes a16z Capital Management and its affiliates. The firm is now unplaced because the reviewed material does not establish both axes at firm level. Marc Andreessen’s personal record remains separate.
Anthropic: distinguish evaluator access from a general slowdown
The pace anchor changed from -26 to 0, and its range from [-48, 5] to [-35, 45]. The company’s unilateral commitment in the cited essay is access for external evaluators. Its Responsible Scaling Policy describes development delays under specified conditions. The revised placement separates evaluator access from a general preference to slow development. The concern anchor remains 51. This is an editorial reassessment, not evidence that the company changed its position.
Responsible Scaling Policy, version 3.4 · We Must Pace the Frontier
Suggest a correction · Machine-readable log · Subscribe to the Atom feed