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

181–190 of 262 posts

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

#181

Post by nickysielicki »

toraway wrote: post #162
nickysielicki wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 t…

> 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?

Because that’s what the law is! Because 1) 3252 gives them a mechanism to exclude a certain vendor from their supply chain broadly, and 2) singling-out a specific vendor for any other reason (favoritism, corruption, etc.) is not legally permissible under any other law.

You can argue that the law doesn’t make sense, but you can’t argue that the law is not the law?

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

#182

Post by nickysielicki »

dragonwriter wrote: post #173
nickysielicki wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> Anthropic is suing for the right to deal in weapons and surveillance, you realize? No, they are suing for the reversal of specific government actions which they contend were taken without lawful authority and for Constitutionally impermissible purposes.

Okay, sure, that’s a lot of fancy words to say a lot of nothing.

What remedy are they seeking? How can this be redressed? (Hint: they want to be a part of the DoD supply chain. If they weren’t, they wouldn’t have standing. If the court can’t do anything for you even if you win, you fail the redressability prong and get bounced for lack of standing.)

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

#183

Post by deaux »

SEJeff wrote: post #76
deaux wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Fun fact: Palantir is powered entirely by Claude Haha what, OpenAI has been in bed with them and their models used by them since before Anthropic was even a thing. Claude will just have been picked because they considered it the strongest at the task at that point in time. It's crazy to see this kind of misinformation.

Palantir maven uses Claude. This is not misinformation, but fact. https://www.reuters.com/technology/palantir-faces-challenge-...

> Palantir is powered entirely by Claude

"Microsoft is powered entirely by OpenAI" because a single one of their things uses it. No it isn't.

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

#184

Post by kirubakaran »

cwillu wrote: post #102
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…

The question is not whether the walls can contain the bull until animal control arrives, but whether any china will remain intact.

The bull comparison is a bit unfair to the bull, who didn't break any china at all in MythBusters https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xzw2iBmRsjs

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

#185

Post by tick_tock_tick »

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.

No one cares about people who don't bother to vote. If you can't manage even that you don't deserve an opinion.

blah blah some exceptional circumstances, etc you all know what I mean.

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

#187

Post by nickysielicki »

dragonwriter wrote: post #168
nickysielicki wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 justifia…

The court hasn’t found anything. A preliminary injunction is a finding of likelihood of success on the merits, not a ruling on the merits. The designation is still in place and will remain in place until the appellate courts weigh in.

On the substance: nothing in 3252 limits ‘adversary’ to foreign actors. Congress used ‘foreign adversary’ in other statutes when it meant foreign adversary. It didn’t here. That’s a problem for you. The government’s brief cites three dictionaries defining adversary as ‘an opponent in a contest, conflict, or dispute.’ A vendor that questions active military operations through intermediaries and demands an approval role in the operational decision chain is an opponent in a dispute. That’s the plain text. Originalist judges will see it that way.

I don’t really follow what you’re saying in point 1, the supply chain risk rationale is in the confidential record of this court case. There’s no way for us to know what’s in there, but it’s safe to assume the government covered their bases.

On point 2, I also don’t understand what you’re saying. They are in court right now. How have they been denied due process?

Point 3 is less interesting to me. Twitter posts by Hegseth obviously don’t really hold water. Anthropic should win here. But that’s not really what this case is about or why it’s interesting.

Your point 4 assumes the government acted outside the law. I’m not convinced of that. That’s the very question being litigated. The government’s position is that it acted within 3252. One San Francisco district judge disagreed at the preliminary injunction stage. That’s not a final answer. Not even close.

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

#188

Post by tick_tock_tick »

AbrahamParangi wrote: post #47

[flagged]

Nah I think a lot of the judicial overreach is just pissing off a lot of the regular hackernews userbase off. This fit the law to a T.

And then if it's not this it's blocking the removal of a temporary order. Just tons of garbage that was implemented without any law now all of a sudden is permanent because a judge decided.

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

#189

Post by charcircuit »

MeetingsBrowser wrote: post #119
charcircuit wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, they can work with someone else. Marking them as a supply risk is one way they can avoid using them and instead use someone else for their needs. So now it seems like we are in a limbo where the government knows that Anthropic is a risk to work with, but they can't official put them on a list that states that.

Can you explain how Anthropic is a risk to work with?

Put simply, the military should have to ask Anthropic for permission each time it needs intelligence. Time is of the essence for the military and having to argue over these things in the moment is not good. These things should be figured out ahead of time and or properly reviewed afterwards. Working with such a company that demands to embed themself into this process with the power to deny any request is too much power. The risk to the military for companies working with Anthropic is that they can get delays or outages when there shouldn't be which can jeopardize time sensitive operations.

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

#190

Post by heavyset_go »

bakies wrote: post #97
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.

The type of contract they had was optional anyway. They could have just not done business with Anthropic in the first place. Really I think this has only promoted their platform as being sane and moral.

> Really I think this has only promoted their platform as being sane and moral.

I mean, maybe for people who aren't paying attention to how Claude's actually weaponized[1]?

This use case is neither "domestic mass surveillance" nor "autonomous weapons" as humans were in the loop:

> Old intelligence and AI? Behind the deadly attack on an Iranian girls’ school that left 175 dead

> The targets for Operation Epic Fury were identified with the aid of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency’s Maven Smart System, which folds in data from surveillance and intelligence, among other data points, and can lay out the information on a dashboard to support officials in their decision-making.

> Maven, created by Palantir, has been coupled with Anthropic’s Claude, a large language model that can vastly speed up that processing.

> Seth Lazar, who leads the Machine Intelligence and Normative Theory Lab at Australian National University, said the use of Claude to select military targets “should send chills down the spine of anyone who's been spending the last few months vibe-coding, vibe-researching, vibe-engineering.”

Doesn't sound sane and moral to me

[1] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politic...

Post reply on HN