There's hope in hard truths below to restore the railless layout (see Rail.astro header).<br>pt-12 clears the solid ink header below lg, where the rail is hidden. --> Skip to content
There's hope in hard truths<br>No single company can answer where AI goes for everyone — a case for open weights to move configuration to the people who need it.<br>July 28, 2026 · 10 min read
Argentina were a goal up on Switzerland during the World Cup Quarterfinals when the break came, and something like a billion people watched a 90-second commercial from Anthropic’s Claude team. The first half of it flashed imagery of a house burning, facial surveillance footage against a crowd, then rows of military gravestones, while a voice with no face asked “Who’s going to hit the brakes if we need to?”<br>The verdict on this ad spot had a pretty quick turnaround. Every AI newsletter I read had a take by Monday.<br>https://x.com/i_zzzzzz/status/2076834673213259947
https://x.com/WillManidis/status/2077014394035134797
https://x.com/SantiagoPliego/status/2077071216184320407
https://x.com/clairevo/status/2076861367923953856
https://x.com/beffjezos/status/2076960380719714787
PrevNext
I use Claude every day – whether for enterprise design workflows or managing daily obstacles, the model family has had a profound impact on my career and life and I owe a lot to their existence. I’ve also been using Qwen, GPT-OSS, Deepseek, and Hermes interchangeably for several automation projects running locally on my Mac Studio. My biases in this tale run in both directions, because while I am an avid user and practitioner of Claude, I don’t buy the story Anthropic’s business model tells either — which goes something along the lines of: “this technology is so dangerous that it has to stay inside our API, under our pricing, subject to our judgment about who’s ready for it.”<br>A danger only you can be trusted to handle is a convenient danger to keep warning about. In February the company dropped the flagship pledge at the center of that story, the commitment not to release a model unless it could show in advance that its safeguards held, and replaced it with goals it describes as nonbinding. And the current open weights controversy is undoubtedly adding fuel to the debate around safety and AI sovereignty.<br>There’s a lot to unpack here, but I believe it starts with using this video as a jumping-off point to figure out where we are today and pave the way forward for democratized AI.
“We hope you’ll find the test a pleasant experience.”<br>The first half is about what AI might do to us: surveillance screencap, disaster reel, the gravestones, a la “who’s gonna hit the brakes”. If you’ve ever watched the cult favorite 1974 thriller The Parallax View, the parallels here are hard to beat. The film’s golden moment is a roughly five-minute sequence of stimuli flashed onto the screen, a psychological screening test to identify sociopaths who could fit the role of the Parallax Corporation’s trained assassins. The montage was also conveniently built to work directly on the viewer’s psyche and reactions to such stimuli, the kind of thing that would never pass a Hollywood studio review today (and precisely why I had to nod to it here).<br>The Arlington Cemetery headstones shown during the ad spot, however, are not grounded in some fiction and belong to real people who died for reasons that have nothing to do with a large language model. The problem with such a visual is that it spends real, sometimes undisclosed grief on a hypothetical that conversely creates the feeling of guilt and/or sense of action within the viewer. A week of pile-on from tech Twitter for that kind of imagery seems somewhat appropriate.
If you reach for the dead to make a point, the point had better be about them.
The second half has a refreshed tone asking a different kind of question, supplemented by a linked online audio experience from Anthropic itself. One woman says it took six years to get her chronic illness diagnosed. A teacher asks whether this could help her be better at her job, and better as a mother. Someone else asks whether it could help people stop feeling misunderstood, conversely bringing people closer to one another.<br>The cost of the controversy was that this introspective half went down with the outright bad half. All the argument that week was about marketing messaging: whether they were sincere, whether they had standing, whether graves belong in an ad break…reasonable things to argue about. But the questions themselves deserved some of that week, too.
The hard truths<br>The one redeeming quality of this campaign is that it put the perspective of people outside of the AI bubble on screen.<br>This perspective has numbers behind it. Pew published a study measuring the distance between user and practitioner last year — the public is likelier to expect harm than benefit.<br>0%<br>of AI experts expect AI to benefit them personally
0%<br>of the U.S. public expect that same personal benefit
What clicked for me...