Pundit ClaimsAI claims by Gary Marcus and Ed Zitron, with the evidence

The whole thing was a scam

We recorded 5 claims from this post. 3 were checked against evidence. 2 can’t be checked. 3 more are held. Read the post at its source.

Claims from this post (5)

In the order they appear in the post. Each quotation is the speaker’s words in this post. A label such as “Supported” or “Can’t be checked” is the claim’s current assessment; its page has the evidence and the reasons.

  1. Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid

  2. Assessment: UnresolvedSaid

    Observation

    “Worse, they did it in favor of someone else who took pretty similar terms and happened to have given more campaign contributions.”

    Our reading: The government acted in favor of someone else (the OpenAI/Altman side) who took pretty similar terms to Anthropic's and happened to have given more campaign contributions.

    No horizon Evidence as of

    Limitation: Executives' personal donations are not corporate contributions.

  3. Assessment: SupportedSaid

    Observation

    “It’s one thing for the government to reject Anthropic’s terms—and entirely another to banish them permanently and, absurdly and punitively declare them a supply chain risk.”

    Our reading: The US government permanently banished Anthropic and absurdly and punitively declared it a supply chain risk, going beyond merely rejecting its terms.

    No horizon Evidence as of

    Limitation: Formal designation followed in March.

  4. Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid

    Recommendation or value judgment

    “Anthropic deserves a chance at EXACTLY the same terms; anything else reeks of corruption.”

    Our reading: Anthropic should be given a chance at exactly the same government terms as OpenAI; anything else would look corrupt.

    No horizon

  5. Assessment: SupportedSaid

    Observation

    “The company ripped off a lot of writer’s work (per the $1.5B settlement), and recently walked back its core safety pledge.”

    Our reading: Anthropic ripped off a lot of writers' work, as shown by its $1.5B settlement.

    No horizon Evidence as of

    Limitation: The assessment reads 'ripped off' as unauthorized acquisition, not unlawful training.

Held from this post (3)

These records did not pass every check, so nothing about them is published. Held is not a finding.