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

Statement on the comments from Secretary of War Pete Hegseth

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 392 posts

Re: Statement on the comments from Secretary of War Pete Hegseth

#111

Post by mikeyouse »

cowsandmilk wrote: post #66
bigtex88 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it's 100% these idiots pushing their fascist propaganda just like they tried to "rename" the Department of Defense to the Department of War. Most members of the military never even see actual fighting.

It is not a Trumpism. As an example, it has been on Wiktionary since 2008, well before Trump. https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=warfighter&actio...

It’s been a term in rare-to-moderate use since the 1990s — Trump/Hegseth ramped it up to 11 and it’s every 3rd word out of Hegseth’s mouth because he thinks it sounds tough.

Re: Statement on the comments from Secretary of War Pete Hegseth

#112

Post by biophysboy »

tokyobreakfast wrote: post #87
SanjayMehta wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Around the time Hegseth was appointed secretary of war. It's a trump thing. Edit: so it's been around for longer, but the Trump regime seems to love it bigly so I'm sticking with my observation. It's a trump regime thing.

[flagged]

How often was the term used before last year?

Re: Statement on the comments from Secretary of War Pete Hegseth

#113

Post by Rapzid »

educasean wrote: post #105
Rapzid wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

All corporations are to an extent. It’s a question of magnitude, not absolutes. You, too, are driven by money. Yet I’m certain you maintain a set of principles and values. Let’s keep the discussion productive yeah?

Sure, where is your productive output? Cause that's drivel.

Anthropic kept referring to Hegseth as "Secretary of War" and the DoD as "Department of War". Which is horseshit. This whole thing is Anthropic flailing.

Re: Statement on the comments from Secretary of War Pete Hegseth

#114

Post by quietsegfault »

chirau wrote: post #13

Doesn't NSA have a backdoor to all these companies by default? I could have sworn I read somewhere years ago that the government demands a backdoor to all US companies if they can't get in on their own.

I have worked at a number of software companies that would be "interesting" to get access to, with enough intimate information to know if there was a super-sekret backdoor. If "all US companies" had to comply .. well .. I guess I was really lucky to work for those that somehow fell through the cracks.

Re: Statement on the comments from Secretary of War Pete Hegseth

#115

Post by arjie »

lebovic wrote: post #94

I used to work at Anthropic, and I wrote a comment on a thread earlier this week about Anthropic's first response and the RSP update [1][2]. I think many people on HN have a cynical reaction to Anthropic's actions due to of their own lived experiences with tech companies. Sometimes, that holds: my part of the company looked like Meta or Stripe, and it's hard not to regress to the mean as you scale. But not every patt…

This is a pretty classic mistake most people who are in high-profile companies make. They think that some degree of appealing to people who were their erstwhile opponents will win them allies. But modern popular ethics are the Grim Trigger and the Copenhagen Interpretation of Ethics. You cannot pass the purity test. One might even speculate that passing the purity test wouldn't do anything to get you acceptance.

Personally, I wish that the political alignment I favour was as Big Tent as Donald Trump's administration is. I think he can get Zohran Mamdani in the room and say "it's fine; say you think I'm a fascist" and then nonetheless get what he wants. But it just so happens that the other side isn't so. So such is life. We lose and our allies dwindle since anyone who would make an overture to us, we punish for the sin of not having been born a steadfast believer.

Our ideals are "If you weren't born supporting this cause, we will punish you for joining it as if you were an opponent". I don't think that's the path to getting what one wants.

Re: Statement on the comments from Secretary of War Pete Hegseth

#116

Post by fzeroracer »

MathMonkeyMan wrote: post #100
fzeroracer wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the Trump admin so chooses, they could absolutely obliterate Anthropic in an instant. They don't really care about tricky things like 'legality' or 'the court of law', they could just force everyone to stop interacting with them, raid their offices and steal all their shit. Perhaps they should've found their spine a year earlier; right now their only hope is that the admin isn't stupid enough to crash the propped-…

> They don't really care about tricky things like 'legality' or 'the court of law', they could just force everyone to stop interacting with them, raid their offices and steal all their shit. This is criticism that I would use to describe countries like China and Russia, and many other poorer ones. Were the Trump administration to do this, it would be unequivocal evidence that we are dealing with an unlawful insurgent…

This is all stuff they've already done in the past few months alone. I think it's time for people to take their heads out of the sand and look what's been happening around them.

Re: Statement on the comments from Secretary of War Pete Hegseth

#117

Post by post-it »

thirtygeo wrote: post #88
steve_adams_86 wrote: post #68

Anthropic is welcome to set up shop here in Canada! I hear Victoria BC is great. Absolutely brimming, overflowing with technology talent

Actually why is nobody in Cali just trying to join Canada - would be better for everyone in terms of more similar culture and values. Weird that it isn't discussed more

Canada isn't interested in being part of a country that's 50% American either.

Re: Statement on the comments from Secretary of War Pete Hegseth

#120

Post by kyle-rb »

dmix wrote: post #61
parl_match wrote: post #7

Anthropic's stance here is admirable. If nothing else, their acknowledgement of not being able to predict how these powerful technologies can be abused is a bold and intelligent position to take.

It’s not just admirable it’s the obvious position to take and any alternative is head scratching. It’s clear that this is mostly a glorified loyalty test over a practical ask by the administration. Strangely reminiscent of Soviet or Chinese policies where being agreeable to authority was more important than providing value to the state.

If it's a loyalty test then you'd think the DoD would be willing to let them "fail" and simply drop the contract, but instead they're threatening to label Anthropic a supply chain risk.

If we're going by Occam's razor: it's Friday so Pete probably started drinking ~10:30-11am.

Post reply on HN