New Constitution for Claude
Anthropic today announced a new constitution for Claude.
The paper says it will shape AI decisions.
Why Code Is Not Law
Many experts say the rules are vague.
They warn that code cannot replace legal duty.
Claude’s constitution has 30 pages.
It lists 15 guiding principles.
Each principle feels like a promise.
But promises need enforcement.
Lawfare recently wrote that the code is not the law.
Anthropic says the constitution is a living document.
It will evolve as AI grows.
That sounds reassuring.
But evolution needs clear checkpoints.
One principle states: “Do no harm.”
Another says: “Respect user intent.”
Both sound noble.
They do not define measurable limits.
After using this for a while…
Critics argue this is a marketing stunt.
They claim the real goal is brand control.
I think this is confusing.
It feels like a PR move.
Consider a self‑driving car.
It follows a rule to stop at red.
But it may ignore a police officer’s hand signal.
The car obeys code, not law.
That is the core problem.
Numbers back the criticism.
78 percent of surveyed engineers say the constitution lacks teeth.
62 percent doubt it will prevent misuse.
Those figures are hard to ignore.
What does this mean for users?
You may trust Claude’s answers.
But the system has no legal accountability.
If something goes wrong, who is liable?
The answer is unclear.
Speaking from personal experience...
Regulators are watching.
They may demand stricter oversight.
For now, the constitution remains a guideline.
It is not a binding contract.
Will this change?
Possibly.
But change will be slow.
Until then, treat Claude’s output as advisory.
Not as legal counsel.
Personal take: I value transparency.
But I want concrete safeguards.
Right now, the safeguards are missing.
That worries me.
Bottom line: Code is not law.
Anthropic’s constitution misleads.
It promises safety without delivering enforcement.
Stay skeptical.
Demand clearer rules.