We do not think Anthropic should be designated as a supply chain risk

Post by mlyle » Sun, Mar 01, 2026, 4:16 AM UTC

janalsncm wrote: post #141

mlyle wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

? we're talking about autonomous weapons systems. That would be internationally. Secondarily, we're talking about domestic surveillance / law enforcement. That would be domestic. (But they do not find an issue with international intelligence gathering-- which is a legitimate purpose of national security apparatus).

I think the person you are replying to takes issue with the thing which you have simply asserted.

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Mar 01, 2026, 4:16 AM UTC

_heimdall wrote: post #115

jedberg wrote: post #107

From what I can tell, the key difference between Anthropic and OpenAI in this whole thing is that both want the same contract terms, but Antropic wants to enforce those terms via technology, and OpenAI wants to enforce them by ... telling the Government not to violate them. It's telling that the government is blacklisting the company that wants to do more than enforce the contract with words on paper.

That isn't my understanding. OpenAI and others are wanting to limit the government to doing what is lawful based on what laws the government writes. Anthropic is wanting to draw their own line on what is allowed regardless of laws passed.

Post by yoyohello13 » Sun, Mar 01, 2026, 4:26 AM UTC

IAmGraydon wrote: post #158

jwpapi wrote: post #91

No wonder they think they’re close to AGI when they think we are that stupid. > The AI System will not be used to independently direct autonomous weapons in any case where law, regulation, or Department policy requires human control, nor will it be used to assume other high-stakes decisions that require approval by a human decisionmaker under the same authorities. This whole sentence does do absolutely nothing its st…

These people truly believe we're all idiots.

Post by abofh » Sun, Mar 01, 2026, 4:29 AM UTC

roxolotl wrote: post #136

_heimdall wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That isn't my understanding. OpenAI and others are wanting to limit the government to doing what is lawful based on what laws the government writes. Anthropic is wanting to draw their own line on what is allowed regardless of laws passed.

I’m so confused by the focus on “all lawful use.” Yea of course a contract without terms of use implicitly is restricted by laws. But contracts with terms of use are incredibly common, if not almost every single contract ever signed.

Post by DrewADesign » Sun, Mar 01, 2026, 4:38 AM UTC

abofh wrote: post #177

roxolotl wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m so confused by the focus on “all lawful use.” Yea of course a contract without terms of use implicitly is restricted by laws. But contracts with terms of use are incredibly common, if not almost every single contract ever signed.

If the president does it, it's not illegal. These were words issued by the president - which means at face value, if Trump orders it, it's not illegal - that was the fight that was lost today.