Live data from Hacker News

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

cnn.com

161–170 of 262 posts

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

#161
post #117

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.

I hate Trump as much as the next guy but this feels like nitpicking. You're obviously right, but if you choose not to vote then you're implicitly approving of whatever outcome you get.

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

#162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read the order? It directly addresses your comment: > More importantly, as discussed above, no one is entitled to conduct business with the Federal Government, see Perkins, 310 U.S. at 127, and irrespective of the challenged actions, DoW and other federal agencies are free to terminate its contracts and agreements with Anthropic, as Anthropic readily admits. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourt…

This entire event came about because Anthropic raised concerns with Palantir and the Department around how Palantir used Claude when the Pentagon used Palantir in the Maduro raids. The pentagon can terminate its direct contract with Anthropic but it does nothing to address the risk that Anthropic poses to the reliability of Palantir’s services, which are (at this point) critical to the way that the Department operate…

Why are you absolutely convinced the government requesting a contractor (Palantir) no longer use a technology they've determined to be unsuitable for their needs would be "extremely illegal", yet demanding every single company engaged in government contracts can no longer use Anthropic for any use whatsoever is totally fine?

I cannot follow the logic there at all. It's like being concerned that asking your neighbor to move their car would be too rude so your solution is to bulldoze their entire driveway. A federal judge evidently disagrees with your legal theory here so perhaps you're off the mark (in fact they specifically call out that the DoD failed to attempt less drastic remedies in violation of the law behind the designation):

  Defendants’ designation of Anthropic as a “supply chain risk” is likely both contrary to law and arbitrary and capricious. The Department of War provides no legitimate basis to infer from Anthropic’s forthright insistence on usage restrictions that it might become a saboteur.

  There are other serious procedural problems with the government’s actions.    Anthropic had no notice or opportunity to respond, which likely violated its due process rights. And the Department of War flouted procedural safeguards required by Congress before entering the supply chain risk designation, including that it consider less intrusive measures.

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

#163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are they entitled to have a mechanism to force a private company to deal in weapons and surveillance?

[flagged]

You can say this person is an idiot all you want, but the fact of the matter is that if DoD does not want to deal with Anthropic through Palantir, their only legal recourse at this point is to drop Palantir. They shot their shot with this legal gamble to remove Anthropic from the supply chain, and they failed. That's it. Curtains or deal with it.

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

#164
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could be organic dipshits with little to offer the discussion. That's the most common case in my view. Said dipshits tend have an unnecessarily high degree of self regard.

[flagged]

Veiled slurs aren't funny and don't contribute anything to HN.

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

#166

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…

Trump or various departments of his administration have a 90% success rate with cases at the Supreme Court, as compared to a roughly 55-60% success rate at lower courts. The judiciary can still work, but the highest judiciary in the land is pretty soundly in his pocket. Trump's most significant defeat at the Supreme Court, overturning his signature tariffs policy, was viewed by some as a sign that the Supreme Court remained independent and defiant... but that's pretty clearly not the case, at least not up to this point.

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

#167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it turns out our laws make it hard for the government to do a lot of things because making it easy for them to do things leads to some deeply authoritarian bullshit.

What a beautiful/horrifying inversion of logic. The government does it the legal way, through an existing law, and you’re short circuiting and pattern matching to “the government is trying to work around the law”. The DoD is not trying to sneak its way out of behaving legally. On the contrary, they’re doing it the legal way and you’re suggesting that they could just do it the illegal way.

Again, you of undue certainty: the government attempted this potentially legal avenue, and it was adjudicated as impermissible. Meaning what they tried didn't work. Why are you acting like no one else here understands what has happened? Probability dictates that you are almost certainly not the smartest person in the room.

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

#168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one is forcing the DoD to contract with a company.

DoD would like to use Palantir. DoD also believes Anthropic is pursuing posttraining in future models that will limit the effectiveness of Palantir tooling, if used by Palantir, for the purposes of DoDs mission. What other legal mechanism do they have to prevent Palantir from specifically not subcontracting out to Anthropic, other than a supply chain risk designation? Note that directly asking Palantir to prefer Goog…

> DoD would like to use Palantir. DoD also believes Anthropic is pursuing posttraining in future models that will limit the effectiveness of Palantir tooling, if used by Palantir, for the purposes of DoDs mission.

> What other legal mechanism do they have to prevent Palantir from specifically not subcontracting out to Anthropic, other than a supply chain risk designation?

Even assuming the stated concern was justifiable, and even assuming that there was no alternative mechanism, that does not:

(1) Justify them failing to what is explicit required for the supply chain risk designation,

(2) Create an exception to the 5th Amendment Due Process Clause, which (for reasons stated in the ruling) merely meeting the facial standards in the statute for the supply chain risk designation does not do when the supplier is (contrary to the motivating justification for the statutory provision) a domestic supplier where the government has no special evidence that it can demonstrate for exigency,

(3) Justify the other challenged actions covered by the injunction (like the Hegseth Directive ordering a much broader ban than is imposed by the supply chain risk designation, or the earlier Presidential Directive ordering an even broader ban than the Hegseth Directive.)

(4) Really, do anything at all legally, because it is not a principal of US law that the government, if it has a good motive, is free to act outside of the law merely because there is no provision inside the law which meets its desires.

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

#169

What's the point of a supply chain risk distinction if you can't mark a company as a risk if they express that they will be a risk?

What's the point of the Constitution when the government can ignore it at their discretion?

Freedom Treater.

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

#170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

You can say this person is an idiot all you want, but the fact of the matter is that if DoD does not want to deal with Anthropic through Palantir, their only legal recourse at this point is to drop Palantir. They shot their shot with this legal gamble to remove Anthropic from the supply chain, and they failed. That's it. Curtains or deal with it.

You really think the world works that way? One judge with two years on the bench makes a determination after two weeks of consideration and the case is closed forever?

This injunction doesn’t take effect for a week, precisely so that the Department has time to appeal this to the 9th circuit. And even if the 9th circuit doesn’t stay it, SCOTUS will. This court has stayed district court injunctions against the executive on national security grounds multiple times. They are not going to let a single district judge in San Francisco dictate military procurement during an active war. Obviously. OBVIOUSLY.

Lin didn’t drop Palantir from the defense supply chain unilaterally. The world does not work that way. Obviously. She issued a preliminary injunction that will be appealed before it takes effect. The DoD has not “shot their shot.” This lawsuit hasn’t even started yet.

Post reply on HN