the government should not be using any private LLM, they should build their own internal systems using publicly available LLM's, which change frequently anyway. I don't see why they would put their trust in a third party like that. This back and forth about "ethics" is a bunch of nonsense, and can be solved simply by going for a custom solution which would probably be orders of magnitude cheaper in the long run. The most expensive part is the GPU's used for inference, which can be produced in silicon [1].
Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War
351–360 of 1001 posts
Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War
#352It's not named the Department of War because Congress didn't rename it. Other than that, good on ya.
It's really not the right thing to be bikeshedding. The people calling the shots call themselves the Department of War. No need to die on hills that don't matter.
> It's really not the right thing to be bikeshedding. The people calling the shots call themselves the Department of War. No need to die on hills that don't matter.
From the first chapter of the book On Tyranny by Timothy Snyder, an historian of Central and Eastern Europe, the Soviet Union, and the Holocaust:
> Do not obey in advance.
* https://timothysnyder.org/on-tyranny
* https://archive.org/details/on-tyranny-twenty-lessons-from-t...
Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War
#353I am incredibly proud to be a customer, both consumer level and as a business, of Anthropic and have canceled my OpenAI subscription and deleted ChatGPT.
Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War
#354Good to them standing up to this administration. I doubt they actually want to put Claude in the kill-chain but this gives them a nice opportunity to go after 'woke AI' and maybe internal ammunition to go through the switching costs for xAI - given Elon more reason to line republican campaign coffers.
I'm guessing this is because Anthropic partners with Google Cloud which has the necessary controls for military workloads while xAI runs in hastily constructed datacenter mounted on trucks or whatever to skirt environmental laws.
Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War
#355It's not named the Department of War because Congress didn't rename it. Other than that, good on ya.
It's really not the right thing to be bikeshedding. The people calling the shots call themselves the Department of War. No need to die on hills that don't matter.
You're talking about an administration that barred the AP from pressed briefings because they didn't call it the Gulf of America. This is not a bikeshed.
Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War
#356As someone who is potentially their client and not domestic , really reassuring that they have no concerns with mass spying peaceful citizens of my particular corner of the world.
I can imagine that this will be the logical conclusion for many companies, I thought the same thing too, if it's too hard in the USA, they will just move.
Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War
#357I was reading halfway thru and one line struck a nerve with me: > But today, frontier AI systems are simply not reliable enough to power fully autonomous weapons. So not today, but the door is open for this after AI systems have gathered enough "training data"? Then I re-read the previous paragraph and realized it's specifically only criticizing > AI-driven domestic mass surveillance And neither denounces partially a…
What else would you expect? The military is obviously going to develop the most powerful systems they can. Do you want a tech company to say “the military can never use our stuff for autonomous systems forever, the end”? What if Anthropic ends up developing the safest, most cost effective systems for that purpose?
> Do you want a tech company to say “the military can never use our stuff for autonomous systems forever, the end”?
Yes. Absolutely.
Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War
#358This is the strongest statement in the post: > They have threatened to remove us from their systems if we maintain these safeguards; they have also threatened to designate us a “supply chain risk”—a label reserved for US adversaries, never before applied to an American company—and to invoke the Defense Production Act to force the safeguards’ removal. These latter two threats are inherently contradictory: one labels u…
More like the government is treating this like the near term weapon it actually is and, unlike the Manhattan project, the government seems to have little to no control.
Anthropic has been pushing for commonsense AI regulation. Our current administration has refused to regulate AI and attempted to prevent state regulation.
"The government doesn't have control of this technology" is an odd way to think about "the government can't force a company to apply this technology dangerously."
Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War
#359This is the strongest statement in the post: > They have threatened to remove us from their systems if we maintain these safeguards; they have also threatened to designate us a “supply chain risk”—a label reserved for US adversaries, never before applied to an American company—and to invoke the Defense Production Act to force the safeguards’ removal. These latter two threats are inherently contradictory: one labels u…
> This contradictory messaging puts to rest any doubt that this is a strong arm by the governemnt to allow any use. Why the hell should companies get to dictate on their own to the government how their product is used?
> Why the hell should companies get to dictate on their own to the government how their product is used?
Well:
"""
Imagine that you created an LLC, and that you are the sole owner and employee.
One day your LLC receives a letter from the government that says, "here is a contract to go mine heavy rare earth elements in Alaska." You don't want to do that, so you reply, "no thanks!"
There is no retaliation. Everything is fine. You declined the terms of a contract. You live in a civilized capitalist republic. We figured this stuff out centuries ago, and today we have bigger fish to fry.
"""
Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War
#360This is the strongest statement in the post: > They have threatened to remove us from their systems if we maintain these safeguards; they have also threatened to designate us a “supply chain risk”—a label reserved for US adversaries, never before applied to an American company—and to invoke the Defense Production Act to force the safeguards’ removal. These latter two threats are inherently contradictory: one labels u…
Does the Defense Production Act force employees to continue working at Anthropic?