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

We do not think Anthropic should be designated as a supply chain risk

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 491 posts

Re: We do not think Anthropic should be designated as a supply chain risk

#231

Post by enlightens »

gchamonlive wrote: post #222
AlexVranas wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OpenAI is playing games. When Anthropic says they have red lines, they mean "We refuse to let you use our models for these ends, even if it means losing nearly a billion dollars in business." When OpenAI says they have red lines, they mean "We are going to let the DoD do whatever the hell they want, but we will shake our fist at them while they do it." That's why they got the contract. The DoD was clear about what th…

[flagged]

Only Congress can change the name of a federal department, so the Department of Defense is still properly called that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_14347

Re: We do not think Anthropic should be designated as a supply chain risk

#233

Post by DowsingSpoon »

gchamonlive wrote: post #222
AlexVranas wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OpenAI is playing games. When Anthropic says they have red lines, they mean "We refuse to let you use our models for these ends, even if it means losing nearly a billion dollars in business." When OpenAI says they have red lines, they mean "We are going to let the DoD do whatever the hell they want, but we will shake our fist at them while they do it." That's why they got the contract. The DoD was clear about what th…

[flagged]

The Department of Defense was established by the National Security Act of 1947. If the Congress wanted to change the name then they would pass another law to do so.

An executive order is not law.

Re: We do not think Anthropic should be designated as a supply chain risk

#235

Post by tadfisher »

roughly wrote: post #61
3eb7988a1663 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not see this as any mastermind play, but fully compromising principles. Which is a play. "Donations" to a corrupt regime + signing a deal that says DoD can do whatever they want is not out maneuvering so much as rolling in the pig stye.

So is the theory that OpenAI believes it can’t compete on the open market or that they don’t know this will eventually cost them their consumer business?

The reality is that all data we have created and will create that is accessible on the public Internet will be used to train autonomous weapons systems used to kill humans. So the consumer business will be lost eventually, no matter what OpenAI believes.

Re: We do not think Anthropic should be designated as a supply chain risk

#238

Post by ikidd »

gchamonlive wrote: post #222
AlexVranas wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OpenAI is playing games. When Anthropic says they have red lines, they mean "We refuse to let you use our models for these ends, even if it means losing nearly a billion dollars in business." When OpenAI says they have red lines, they mean "We are going to let the DoD do whatever the hell they want, but we will shake our fist at them while they do it." That's why they got the contract. The DoD was clear about what th…

[flagged]

Gulf of Mexico.

Re: We do not think Anthropic should be designated as a supply chain risk

#239

Post by laughing_man »

a2128 wrote: post #178
laughing_man wrote: post #38

The USG should not be in the position that it can't manage key technologies it purchases. If Anthropic doesn't want to relinquish control of a tech it's selling, the Pentagon should go with another vendor.

You are misrepresenting the situation. The debate isn't about whether they should go with another vendor or not. Everybody can agree that they would have the right to pick a different vendor. That's not what they're doing, they're instead trying to force Anthropic into doing what they want by applying a designation previously only reserved for Chinese companies like Huawei as punishment for taking their stance, with…

The Pentagon does this kind of thing all the time. It's just usually not this official.
Post reply on HN