Hacker News discussion pushes back on the proposal
2 Nov 2 5:30 PM · 9d ago · 2 articles · 3 posts · 9 comments · 3 sources · development 2 of 2
The op-ed was submitted to Hacker News and drew 90 comments, with most commenters arguing the SEC's mandate is disclosure, not blocking IPOs based on business-risk judgments, while some raised alternate concerns about timing and fairness.
“The SEC's job isn't to adjudicate on whether Anthropic is a good or bad bet for investors. Its job is to ensure that investors have adequate visibility, and then get out of the way.”
marstenMatt Scherer Author, policy analyst at Open Markets Institute
Dario Amodei Anthropic CEOAnthropic AI company planning IPOU.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Regulator being asked to intervene
The whole story articlespostscomments the bright band is this development · numbered dots are the others · click one to jump
Reported in the same hours no headline names this development itself — these 1 claim were published in its stretch
-
first by HN Best, 9d ago · also HN Frontpage, Tech Policy Press
What people said 24 voices · best of 29 · verbatim
-
The SEC is less of a protective agency and more of a revenue-generating agency (in practice and to some degree in principle). If Anthropic does not go public, you have nothing to stop them from receiving private funding from sovereign wealth funds. You have to understand that the Vision Fund failure did not mean that overnight sovereign wealth…
-
If your employer sponsored 401k plan doesn’t offer alternative investment options that allows you to avoid index funds you do not want to invest in you need to contact your employer and attempt to start a conversation about using a different investment firm for their 401k. If your employer doesn’t listen you need to go to a different employer, or…
-
J
Matt Scherer of the Open Markets Institute argues the SEC should block Anthropic’s IPO until the company provides “two consecutive quarters of audited financial statements,” with all material information about its spending commitments disclosed. The SEC Should Block Anthropic...
-
Not going to argue with the article on any front.But when it comes to measuring productivity of transformational technology, a lot of things make that hard.A lot of early use can be considered exploratory, whether it was intended to be or not. Meaning it was productive, but in a way that pays off down the road, not as much up front.Not only are…
-
K
A good in depth read on anthropic's ipo. https://www. techpolicy.press/the-sec-shoul d-block-anthropics-ipo-to-protect-the-public/ # anthropic # ai # ipo # business
-
> Multiple studies, including from organizations notable for their bullishness on AI, suggest LLMs are not accelerating productivity or otherwise generating positive returns on investment for most businesses.Maybe this is true for most businesses, but that's because most businesses are not really leaning into agentic AI yet. It seems software devs…
-
This author seems to be focused on if Anthropic will continue to grow and return value in the future. But it's disappointing that no one has questioned why they waited so long to go public. If they had gone public at a $100b evaluation, everyday people and pension funds could have invested in and seen the returns that AI has already delivered…
-
I think they should still go public, and it shouldn't be stopped.To be honest, whether a company is operating well or not will become clear after it goes public.At the same time, only with financial transparency can there be better supervision.Also, this is one way for everyone to participate in AI construction and development to some extent.I…
-
As long as the S-1 is honest, the SEC is doing its job.A real risk is the market cap, including insider holdings, being large enough to force the stock into major indices. That makes the stock a must-buy for index funds. That in turn props up the stock regardless of how crappy the financial position and how small the float. That was controversial…
-
There’s plenty of argument about how if a company has an IPO then they are, by definition, part of the market. And if you bought an index fund that means to represent a part of the market that this company is in, then that company should be in the index fund.You had lots of choices, you made this choice, and you can always change your mind. Do we…
-
There's middle ground.Like I would ban controlling share classes. I guess there could be an exception if they had an aggressive conversion provision that turned them into normal shares as the company grew.You also omit an important constituency in your formulation. Corporations are extended limited liability with the idea that it will benefit the…
-
If the SEC allowed the SpaceX IPO they most certainly will allow the Anthropic IPO. From my point of view, the Anthropic IPO is a much more genuine one than the shenanigans that were going on with SpaceX, yet we’re all investing into that through ETFs as well.Additionally, some ETFs have built in protections to rule out businesses that are not yet…
-
Then what would you say to big boys and girls (i.e., the moneybags) getting into bed together and decide that the best for all the big boys and girls is to ensure that the public holds the bag – via obvious pathways of funds, pension, and retirement scehemes etc?> gave politicians arbitrary veto power:-) That ship has sailed for USA (at least for…
-
It's mainly the FTC, but I think the SEC does enforce some rules on pyramid schemes etc. even if the operators of them aren't being misleading. Certain business models are ruled out.Not that I think that applies here, just that they go beyond making sure everything has accurate filing and disclosure etc. and do have some mandate to look into the…
-
The entire A.I. Bubble is one big scam with a few companies flooding the internet with positive reviews for their products and even buying entire companies to put a positive spin on use cases for their product. The Bun purchase comes to mind.The canary was that these A.I. companies were investing in each other to pump up their stocks and keep them…
-
The SEC would beg to differ with your first para. I imagine that "protect" involves "adjudication":"Founded to help our country respond to the Great Depression, we’re the agency that protects investors from misconduct, promotes fairness & efficiency in the securities markets, and facilitates capital formation for those looking to hire, innovate…
-
> the number of Americans using AI at work fell significantly between the summers of 2025 (46%) and 2026 (33%).Surprising. I couldn't find the study they're citing, and they didn't include a link. Anecdotally, my friends across various industries (tech, finance, medicine, scientific research) are all using AI more heavily as time goes on.
-
The sources in this article as so dubious. "ChicagoLand" Chicago chamber of commerce? A Tom's Hardware article from February of '26. Things have changed so much since February, it's not even funny to quote something so old. A bunch of the other articles are from 2025.This is kind of desperate. The argument falls flat.
-
The SEC's job isn't to adjudicate on whether Anthropic is a good or bad bet for investors. Its job is to ensure that investors have adequate visibility, and then get out of the way.It would be VERY BAD if we gave politicians arbitrary veto power over who IPOs and who doesn't. The threat of corruption should be obvious.
-
The SEC doesn't exist to play favourites. If Anthropic has broken a law they can be blocked for that. If not, then it would be unfair to them to block them for things that other companies with IPOs have done. Live by market primacy, die by market primacy.
-
I thought they were going to say, we have a duty to protect the public from the self-mutating swarms of artificial life about to explode onto our networks (as per the Astra/Qwen article on front page), but no, they meant the dubious VC finances!
-
The article suggests exactly that requiring to delay IPO until 2 consequent quarters of detailed financial audits will be available from Anthropic. Without that there is simply not enough information for an investor to make a rational choice.
-
Over and over again they talk about how Anthropic's margins are getting squeezed. They're so squeezed in fact that Anthropic has merely 85% gross margins! They're earning merely $6 in revenue for every $1 they spend!
-
The only real argument here is that Anthropic has Q3 numbers but they aren't included in the prospectus because they may be bad. Delaying the IPO by a few weeks would solve that problem.
All 2 developments of Op-ed urges SEC to block Anthropic's IPO over its $900B in… →
MastodonHacker NewsNewswiresGoogle NewsReddit