131–140 of 175 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Palantir-like" I guess you've chosen to do the editorializing for the writers in lieu of their presence here.
They are literally a Palantir competitor: https://www.samdesk.io/about-us
The editorializing in this article is quite something. If I strip out the editorializing, I think the conclusions are: 1. Someone told Claude they had an AR-15 and the CEO of Anthropic was "in their sights". Anthropic reported this to the police. 2. Anthropic contracts with a security agency. 3. Anthropic is looking to build in-house capability for security. Anthropic clearly has high-value targets (see, e.g. the per…
Your Microsoft example is only equivalent if Microsoft was also scanning hotmail and MSN messenger for threats against the company.
I think it's because email has the postal system metaphor to work with: I put my letter in an envelope, the post office just forwards it. Similarly, Hotmail does not _need_ knowledge of the contents of my email to forward it to its destination. If you asked a user who had access to their email, they might reasonably expect only the recipient would.
With LLMs, it is quite clear to the user that you are interacting with _something_ that is inspecting your messages and reacting to them. If you asked the user who had access to their inputs, they'd probably say "Claude" or "Anthropic". Thus, when Claude rats them out for threatening violence, they probably wouldn't be that surprised.
To me, this feels much closer to someone phoning up Microsoft's customer support phone number and mentioning that they have a gun and know where Bill Gates lives, and that then resulting in a visit from the police. I do idly wonder if it was intentional that this user had this conversation with Claude, and not, say, with ChatGPT or Gemini.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know how you inferred that. I said nothing about restricting offline computing.
Ok, so the rules for someone who selfhosts vs. Hosts for others should be different? What if I provide inference services to my family members, should I monitor their interactions and report them if I find anything dangerous?
If I keep a diary offline on paper I can expect that to be private.
If I keep a diary on a hosted diary-as-a-service, I cannot.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Palantir-like" I guess you've chosen to do the editorializing for the writers in lieu of their presence here.
Explain, it looks like samdesk is in a more narrow domain but overlapping and very related methods and business. Un-palantir-like seems like it would be a stronger editorialization.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Suppose for the sake of argument you did not vote for Donald Trump, would it not be stressful if no one told you in advance that a group of Trump supporters are protesting against the “unfair” votes right in front of you? No. There will most likely be a way to get around or through the crowd. The article talks about a protest and not an angry mob. > Sometimes you just don’t want politics in your life and just want…
> There will most likely be a way to get around or through the crowd. That’s exactly what the article said what the Anthropic executive did: get into the hotel through a service entrance. So you support and would do what the Anthropic executive did as well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok, so the rules for someone who selfhosts vs. Hosts for others should be different? What if I provide inference services to my family members, should I monitor their interactions and report them if I find anything dangerous?
It's more about what I can expect. If I keep a diary offline on paper I can expect that to be private. If I keep a diary on a hosted diary-as-a-service, I cannot.
You didn't answer my question.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not the only example discussed. Anthropic also partners with the Palantir-like Samdesk: > In a wide-ranging conversation about threat monitoring and analysis, the interview also touches on monitoring activists. “Last year we had an executive travel into a major city when we received some intelligence through Samdesk about a planned protest,” Ellison said. The originally scheduled protest was moved up due to pe…
> Without it our executives would have departed their meetings, they would have ran right into the heart of the disruption Oh no, The Executives might have been exposed to the real world! Why aren't people thinking more about The Executives and what dangers they must face?! Good thing we can systematically monitor every other human being so The Executives don't have to see these terrorists on our streets.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Weird that they don't compare themselves to Palantir then! https://imgur.com/a/eKAQKSN
Why would you take any of these companies at their word? They know Palantir is toxic.
I have to wonder, though, why doesn't Palantir mention them? https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Apalantir.com+samdesk
They seem to mention actual competitors: https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Apalantir.com+c3
Given your 4D chess logic, they really should be mentioning all their competitors to poison their wells.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pressure on powerful people is good for society. Anyone making life or death decisions for the rest of us should have their own life on the table as well. Charlie Kirk is irrelevant to this conversation. No one has been convicted in his assassination and it's unlikely that it was "activism" since no one has claimed that. He's a guy who said stuff many people found offensive, he also happened to cross a nation state k…
I'm only vaguely familiar with Charlie Kirk and his messaging but assassination is never a valid response to being offended.