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

Judge blocks Pentagon effort to 'punish' Anthropic with supply chain risk label

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 262 posts

Re: Judge blocks Pentagon effort to 'punish' Anthropic with supply chain risk label

#151

Post by xpe »

brookst wrote: post #121
suid wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That may be, but the government doesn't need to declare Anthropic as a "supply chain risk" in order to just not do business with it. A simple clause in all RFPs is all that is needed. The problem with this declaration by the government is that now any company doing any business with the US government would be effectively forbidden from using Anthropic ANYWHERE within their company, which is a huge deal, because the g…

Perhaps. But certainly those companies will factor in the risk that this is overturned, or that the government pursues other extrajudicial means to punish those who do business with Anthropic. All things equal, you’d be better off not exposing yourself to risk of financial harm or other punitive measures. Which is the whole point of the government’s action in the first place.

> All things equal, you’d be better off not exposing yourself to risk of financial harm or other punitive measures.

This isn't necessarily true. This is a complex decision; the logic above frames the decision narrowly, with a short-term time horizon. This kind of decision calls for game theory, not merely an individualistic calculus. Appeasing Trump isn't a winning strategy in the long-run. History shows that cooperation (e.g. pushing back) against authoritarianism is often a better strategy. Consumers may reward companies that behave well. Bottom line: you have to game it out -- no one commenting here has done that, I'll bet. So until someone has ... stay agnostic analytically.

Re: Judge blocks Pentagon effort to 'punish' Anthropic with supply chain risk label

#152

Post by Natsu »

zaptheimpaler wrote: post #142
mr_00ff00 wrote: post #93

Had this conversation with a friend, but I think as an America you can be very optimistic about the institutional strength of democracy in the country. People are very pessimistic recently, but if anything, we are seeing that our system works well. A person got into power that a majority voted for, but when he oversteps, the courts and other institutions (even judges and fed reserve chairs he picked!) seem to hold hi…

lol judges have ruled 100s or 1000s of ICE detentions in various states illegal by now. None of that has stopped ICE from doing what it's doing. This kind of optimism in the law seems naive today because there is no mechanism to actually enforce it. All federal agents have very substantial legal & civil immunity, heads of departments have immunity as well. The head of the legal system is Pam Bondi who isn't even pros…

> judges have ruled 100s or 1000s of ICE detentions in various states illegal by now. None of that has stopped ICE from doing what it's doing.

This is a weird one because ICE has lost so many habeas cases, mostly by dropping them, only for the 8th circuit court of appeals (which covers Minnesota) to overturn that the other day:

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/26/03/253248P.pdf

There was similar precedent in the 5th circuit (Texas) previously, too, but that was not binding on Minnesota:

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/26884355/ca5detention...

So this is pretty weird now, legally, since a ton of lower courts have assumed things didn't work this way and the appeals courts are now saying they're wrong.

Re: Judge blocks Pentagon effort to 'punish' Anthropic with supply chain risk label

#153

Post by [deleted] »

brookst wrote: post #121
suid wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That may be, but the government doesn't need to declare Anthropic as a "supply chain risk" in order to just not do business with it. A simple clause in all RFPs is all that is needed. The problem with this declaration by the government is that now any company doing any business with the US government would be effectively forbidden from using Anthropic ANYWHERE within their company, which is a huge deal, because the g…

Perhaps. But certainly those companies will factor in the risk that this is overturned, or that the government pursues other extrajudicial means to punish those who do business with Anthropic. All things equal, you’d be better off not exposing yourself to risk of financial harm or other punitive measures. Which is the whole point of the government’s action in the first place.

[deleted]

Re: Judge blocks Pentagon effort to 'punish' Anthropic with supply chain risk label

#154

Post by wafflemaker »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #132
paulv wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that a majority voted for A majority of people who voted . Not a majority of eligible voters and certainly not a majority.

Are you saying that if all eligible voters were forced to vote, Trump may have lost the popular vote?

>Are you saying that if all eligible voters were forced to vote, Trump may have lost the popular vote?

I've recently heard a commentary by a man with PhD in international relations* about why has Trump won the elections.

Specialist said that a lot of people who would have voted against Trump didn't vote. That was due to many grave mistakes made by the democrats.

Usually when populists win, it's because the other side blatantly ignores some public issues. This time it was economic hardships, immigration/border control.

There is also the long trend of turning away from the working class and focusing on protecting/supporting the DEI people instead. The working class might feel betrayed and vote against them instead.

"The cost of hubris" - as one of the Minmatar militia missions from Eve online was called.

Re: Judge blocks Pentagon effort to 'punish' Anthropic with supply chain risk label

#155

Post by what »

paulv wrote: post #117
mr_00ff00 wrote: post #93

Had this conversation with a friend, but I think as an America you can be very optimistic about the institutional strength of democracy in the country. People are very pessimistic recently, but if anything, we are seeing that our system works well. A person got into power that a majority voted for, but when he oversteps, the courts and other institutions (even judges and fed reserve chairs he picked!) seem to hold hi…

> that a majority voted for A majority of people who voted . Not a majority of eligible voters and certainly not a majority.

Anyone who was eligible but didn’t vote effectively voted for whomever won. The distinction doesn’t matter.

Re: Judge blocks Pentagon effort to 'punish' Anthropic with supply chain risk label

#156

Post by [deleted] »

paulv wrote: post #146
sillysaurusx wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying that if all eligible voters were forced to vote, Trump may have lost the popular vote?

I'm saying that words have meanings and that it's important to be clear about what they are.

[deleted]

Re: Judge blocks Pentagon effort to 'punish' Anthropic with supply chain risk label

#157

Post by xpe »

SEJeff wrote: post #30
why_only_15 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point of the supply chain risk designation was not just to have the DoD stop using Anthropic (they could have done that by just cancelling the contract). Their intended effect was to force every company that sells to the US government, no matter how indirectly, to not use Anthropic in any way, which would effectively destroy them because almost every company is in the supply chain (for example my company is https…

Fun fact: Palantir is powered entirely by Claude and was what was used for the Venezuela operation and for targeting for the Iranian operation.

> Fun fact: Palantir is powered entirely by Claude

Charitably, this is ambiguous. What does the commenter mean exactly by "entirely"?

Re: Judge blocks Pentagon effort to 'punish' Anthropic with supply chain risk label

#159

Post by gopher_space »

AbrahamParangi wrote: post #47

[flagged]

The mistake is thinking that an organic entity won't reject causality when it interferes with their politics.

The interesting thing here is that this isn't an always-on feature. You can actually see the process on a person's face. I was delighted by the recent DOGE depositions because the video quality is good enough to see the guy's eyes stop moving and glaze over.

Re: Judge blocks Pentagon effort to 'punish' Anthropic with supply chain risk label

#160

Post by aardvarkr »

mrkstu wrote: post #83

The issue of course is that the Judge can't change the knowledge that the head of the executive doesn't want people down the chain using this product, so they won't. Anthropic is a dead letter in government circles until the next Presidential election.

That’s fine. They can choose to use whatever model their political hearts desire. the supply chain risk designation means EVERYONE who works with the government isn’t allowed to use Claude. Nearly everyone in tech has some sort of contract with the government.
Post reply on HN