Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

591–600 of 1001 posts

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#591

Post by xvector »

puppycodes wrote: post #567
xvector wrote: post #539

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole reason this is happening is because Anthropic looked into how Claude was used in the Maduro op and found it to violate the negotiated terms of service. Their hard lines are: - no usage of AI to commit murder WITHOUT a human in the loop - no usage of AI for domestic mass surveillance

So... this would be fine with them? Claude: "Are you sure you want me to commit murder?" User: "Yes" Or do you mean Human presses button: Claude: "Do you to commit murder? If so press the button." User: "I pressed the button" Claude: "Great! Now lets summarize what we did."

First one

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#592

Post by hirako2000 »

techblueberry wrote: post #2

So they are such a risk to national security that no contractor that works with the federal government may use them, but they're going to keep using them for six more months? So I guess our national security is significantly at risk for the next six months?

Can't just unplug the thing and use something else.

Obviously the DoD would not want limited use. Strange they don't make their own given their specific needs.

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#593

Post by monknomo »

hobs wrote: post #517
zmgsabst wrote: post #500

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I like how you use the phrase social responsibilities to mean doing whatever the DoD wants which includes spying on the American people and operating autonomous drones to kill people. It's like saying they have social responsibilities to enable murder for people who have been shown to be unthinking murderers justifying the most pointless murders because they think it makes "their side" winners.

That usage turns the entire meaning of social responsibilities on its heads. It's one of those maddening fash tics where they reverse the plain meaning a statement.

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#594

Post by lemming »

doug_durham wrote: post #533
prpl wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably yes. Additionally the (probably more for AWS) won't be allowed to use it internally either. This will probably apply to all the top SaaS/software companies unilaterally. Additionally, every major university will undoubtedly have to terminate the use of Claude. First on the list will be universities that run labs under DOD contracts (e.g. MIT, Princeton, JHU), DOE contracts (Stanford, University of California…

There is no evidence that what you say is true. A tweet is not a legally binding statement.

It will be true as soon as it becomes official though, assuming they actually go through with it and this is not just a bargaining tactic.

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#595

Post by trelane »

echoangle wrote: post #482
trelane wrote: post #269

https://x.com/PalmerLuckey/status/2027500334999081294 It is an interesting point. What's the difference between this use license and others?

If the government thinks the terms of Anthropic are unacceptable, they can just stop using them, right? But why would you then retaliate and ban other companies from making business with Anthropic if they want to be a defense contractor? How do these requirements make Anthropic a supply chain risk that makes them unusable for use by other companies?

> If the government thinks the terms of Anthropic are unacceptable, they can just stop using them, right

That is what they are doing.

> why would you then [....] ban other companies from making business with Anthropic if they want to be a defense contractor

Because, if it shops with Anthropic code, the DoD becomes subject to the restrictions when they receive the contractor's product. Anthropic's limitation is on the use, not (just) on the product or distribution.

To stop using them requires making the suppliers still using them as well.

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#596

Post by spaghetdefects »

throw9x9 wrote: post #554
hoppoli wrote: post #510

American people: latinamerican here. Maybe it's silly to root for a country in the world hegemony arena. I've usually been partial to the USA over China. Now I'm not rooting for your country anymore. As far as I'm concerned, I'd rather have China being the foremost power, at least they seem to be less keen on invading or heavily strong-arming latinamerica

and USA created Islamic terrorism that is plaguing the whole world

Surely you mean Zionist terrorism.

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#597

Post by xvector »

xyzelement wrote: post #284

I am fine with this. If you are a defense contractor, you are a defense contractor, and you follow the military needs that you government believes are necessary - or you stop being a defense contractor. I wouldn't want a bullet manufacturer to hold back on my government based on their own internal sense of ethics (whether I agreed with it or not, it's not their place)

You're fine with a company being designated a supply chain risk, a designation heretofore used exclusively for foreign adversaries and usually a death knell for most companies, because the government wants to break a negotiated terms of service and contract that they already accepted?

The fuck?

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#598

Post by puppycodes »

xvector wrote: post #591
puppycodes wrote: post #567

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So... this would be fine with them? Claude: "Are you sure you want me to commit murder?" User: "Yes" Or do you mean Human presses button: Claude: "Do you to commit murder? If so press the button." User: "I pressed the button" Claude: "Great! Now lets summarize what we did."

First one

Seems like an absurd distinction to me... Reminds me of "I was just following orders"...

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#599

Post by csneeky »

Bluster followed by a "we can't do it now but we will... soon". Whoever has the best model can do what they please you'll see. I work with these things daily as an engineer (been doing this shit for 25 years and wow it's like mana from heaven these days). Believe me no one is going to screw with themselves by not using the best one and right now Anthropic has it.
Post reply on HN