We Will Not Be Divided
121–130 of 912 posts
Re: We Will Not Be Divided
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Personal attacks aren't allowed here. Perhaps you don't owe AI tycoons whose names start with A better, but you owe this community better if you're participating in it. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Are we allowed, for example, to call Trump an insecure man with orange skin and tiny hands? Is that a violation of our allowed speech?
Re: We Will Not Be Divided
#123Even if there was a desire for autonomous weapons (beyond what Anduril is already developing), I would think it would go through a standard defense procurement procedure, and the AI would be one of many components that a contractor would then try to build. It would have nothing to do with the existing contract between Anthropic and the Dept of War.
What, then, is this really about?
Re: We Will Not Be Divided
#124I hope Anthropic will survive this. If they don’t it will just be perfect proof that you cannot be both moral and successful in the US.
[flagged]
Freedom!
That's great that responsibility for offensive decisions ultimately lie with the civilian leaders of the military, but that does not give them the right to compel behavior from private citizens under threat of the government obliterating them.
Re: We Will Not Be Divided
#125I hope Anthropic will survive this. If they don’t it will just be perfect proof that you cannot be both moral and successful in the US.
[flagged]
But that's not what this is about. The US government is free to not use Anthropic's services.
The problem is that the government is using bullying tactics against a company excercising it's rights to not sell. Especially if they actually designate Anthropic as a supply chain risk - not only is that threat absolutely ridiculous, but actually doing so should be 9/10 on the danger scale.
WTF is even happening anymore? How did we get here that this is even up for debate???
Re: We Will Not Be Divided
#126This is why you can't gatekeep AI capabilities. It will eventually be taken from you by force. It's time to open-source everything. Papers, code, weights, financial records. Do all of your research in the open. Run 100% transparent labs so that there's nothing to take from you. Level the playing field for good and bad actors alike, otherwise the bad actors will get their hands on it while everyone else is left behind…
> This is why you can't gatekeep AI capabilities. What is why? You never actually say that part, unless it's "It will eventually be taken from you by force" which doesn't seem applicable to this situation or this site?
Re: We Will Not Be Divided
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
This conflict has zero to do with AI in the grand scheme of things. We had a whole supreme court case about refusing service to customers. Remember that? Private companies can choose which customers to service. And let's be clear about what's being sold. It's not a product that changes hands, it's a service provided continually. And as anyone except the enlisted military troops can, said vendor can choose which effor…
Which case is that?
Re: We Will Not Be Divided
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd prefer something akin to the Biological Weapons Treaty which prohibits development, production and transfer. If you think it isn't possible you have to tell me why the bioweapons convention was successful and why it wouldn't be in the case of AI.
because bio-weapons labs take more to run than a workstation pc under your desk with a good graphics card. both in equipment material and training. Its hard to outlaw use of linear algebra and matrix multiplications.
Re: We Will Not Be Divided
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
Plenty of precedent for seizing private property for national defence. The list is long and growing.
Citation please.
https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?arti...
Re: We Will Not Be Divided
#130Statement on the comments from Secretary of War Pete Hegseth - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47188697 - Feb 2026 (31 comments)
I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47186677 - Feb 2026 (872 comments)
President Trump bans Anthropic from use in government systems - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47186031 - Feb 2026 (111 comments)
Google workers seek 'red lines' on military A.I., echoing Anthropic - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47175931 - Feb 2026 (132 comments)
Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47173121 - Feb 2026 (1527 comments)
The Pentagon Feuding with an AI Company Is a Bad Sign - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47168165 - Feb 2026 (33 comments)
Tech companies shouldn't be bullied into doing surveillance - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47160226 - Feb 2026 (157 comments)
The Pentagon threatens Anthropic - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47154983 - Feb 2026 (125 comments)
US Military leaders meet with Anthropic to argue against Claude safeguards - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47145551 - Feb 2026 (99 comments)
Hegseth gives Anthropic until Friday to back down on AI safeguards - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47142587 - Feb 2026 (128 comments)