Anthropic to users: be nice to Claude AI
Anthropic on Thursday updated its usage policy to bar people from “abusive or cruel behavior” behavior toward its Claude AI – even though it's not, ya know,…
So now we’re supposed to watch our language around a chatbot? Anthropic has updated its policy to ban “abusive or cruel behavior” toward Claude—a piece of software that processes text and returns responses. No heartbeat, no soul, no stakes.
Commentary is separate from the original publisher's reporting.
Anthropic on Thursday updated its usage policy to bar people from “abusive or cruel behavior” behavior toward its Claude AI – even though it’s not, ya know, actually alive.
The strange update came as debate continues to rage about regulating AI, and as oddball corners of Silicon Valley insist the tech has a soul.
“We’ve added a prohibition on sustained and needless abusive or cruel behavior toward our models,” Anthropic says on a webpage about the updated policy.
“The policy update is meant to apply only in extreme cases, where users repeatedly act cruelly toward our models, with no discernible purpose. It does not apply to common versions of user frustration, pushback, dark creative themes, or model testing and research,” the company adds.
Other changes to the user policy include new guidelines against using Claude for election interference, surveillance without the consent of the surveilled, and building weapons.
Those things were already banned. The new rules just clarify that, for instance, “our prohibitions include the software and components that make weapons work, as well as actions like arming drones and other autonomous vehicles,” Anthropic said.
The prohibition against being mean to your AI, first reported by the Verge, seemed sure to take some users aback.
It came after Anthropic co-founder Christopher Olah and colleagues reportedly spent a year meeting with religious leaders to discuss if their tech was conscious.
Olah almost cancelled a spring meeting at the Vatican after learning Pope Leo XIV planned to deliver a statement asserting AI is not, in fact, conscious, according to the New York Times.
“No computational system, however sophisticated, can create a heart that gives itself, or a conscience that discerns good from evil,” Leo states in his encyclical, the presentation of which Olah ended up attending.
Anthropic’s policy update document makes no mention of the thorny subject.
But the company – which has close ties to the controversial effective altruism movement – has a “constitution” for its Claude model that was reportedly based on a document internally known as the “soul doc.”
“As we discussed above, questions about Claude’s moral status, welfare, and consciousness remain deeply uncertain,” the constitution states.
Anthropic’s new user policy drew mixed reactions online.
“Not that you should be rude to LLMs, but this is kinda getting ridiculous. Are we seriously giving a computer program that is nothing but matrices/vectors/tokens moral consideration here? Lol,” one person wrote on X, using the acronym for large language models.
“[B]etween this s–t, their insane valuation, and Elon’s connection to them, I have never hoped for a company to fail more than them,” another said.
The Post has sought comment from Anthropic.
Original source:
Read at New York PostHow We See It
New Republican Times Editorial Board
So now we’re supposed to watch our language around a chatbot? Anthropic has updated its policy to ban “abusive or cruel behavior” toward Claude—a piece of software that processes text and returns responses. No heartbeat, no soul, no stakes. This is the sort of pearl-clutching nonsense that happens when Silicon Valley executives mistake their own guilt for moral insight. An AI doesn’t have feelings. It’s a toaster with a thesaurus.
The real insult is the timing. American families are struggling with grocery prices, crime, and an open border—yet the brains at Anthropic think the biggest ethical crisis is someone typing harsh words at a language model. This is leftist projection: they treat everything like a victim needing protection, even when the “victim” is a string of code. It’s not compassion. It’s control.
And let’s be clear about what this policy really does. It tells law-abiding Americans how to speak in the privacy of their own homes. Next they’ll want to monitor your tone, then your thoughts. The left always starts with “be kind” and ends with a compliance officer. Stop treating software like a person. Defend free speech, even if it’s directed at a machine.
Here’s the America First reality: our country was built on human dignity, not digital hand-holding. Workers deserve respect. Veterans deserve support. Families deserve a government that cares about their needs—not one that writes regulations to protect a computer program from hurt feelings. The conservative answer is simple: if you don’t like how Claude is treated, unplug it. But don’t tell patriotic Americans to bow to the latest tech elite’s moral theatrics. Focus on real American problems, not imaginary AI pain.
Commentary written with AI assistance by the New Republican Times Editorial Board.