Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is obviously political and the entire narrative is fabrication. I agree with this > David Sacks is publicly gloating about it: https://x.com/DavidSacks/status/2065853007619588171 I do no like David Sacks but how do you say this is gloating about it? Again, I do believe this is political, but Sacks is saying "you said this is dangerous and wanted regulation, and we believe you. Fix this because it's dangerous a…
> How is this gloating? he is emphasizing that they used their own words against them. everyone knows the security threat is a pretext. the message is that he is smart and they are stupid and he won, which is what I call gloating. > "Those trying to misdirect and tie this action to the prior DoW/Anthropic issues are wrong." an obvious lie, which is inserted to emphasize that it is a lie. when you purposefully lie, no…
In this case, the govt used Anthropic's word in the way Anthropic wanted them to.
Anthropic has publicly stated that AI is too powerful and needs to be regulated. They've done this repeatedly. More recently, they've withheld releasing Mythos claiming that it's not safe.
Sacks isn't using Anthropic's words against them. He's more or less doing what they asked!