Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk • Hacker News Board

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#201

Post by mediaman » Thu, Mar 05, 2026, 9:44 PM UTC

cakealert wrote: post #107

Rudybega wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anthropic and the military had a contract. The military wanted to change the terms of that contract. Anthropic said no, which is their clearly defined contractual right. They got labeled a supply chain risk. How is this anything other than a shakedown? Does contract law mean anything to this administration?

The other such labeled companies have contracts too.

10 USC 3252 has only been used once, against Acronis AG, a Swiss company with Russian connections.

Acronis did not have DOD contracts.

Other companies (Huawei) have been deemed risks under different laws, or by Congress, but they also didn't have direct DOD contracts.

Do you have any evidence for your assertion? Did you check if it is true before posting?

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#202

Post by cheesecompiler » Thu, Mar 05, 2026, 9:44 PM UTC

quentindanjou wrote: post #194

stared wrote: post #182

Should it be officially marked as the date of transition from liberal democracy to illiberal democracy? Such tampering with companies is a smoking gun. Let's wait until there is another decision seizing this (or others') company assets.

I always find it interesting to listen US citizen answer "What would it take for you to not consider your country a democracy?" and admire the wide range of answers and denials.

Right, as if _this_ is straw that breaks the camel's back, and not the pile of hay the camel has been carrying for decades.

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#203

Post by 1718627440 » Thu, Mar 05, 2026, 9:44 PM UTC

thinkingtoilet wrote: post #161

softwaredoug wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It opens the door for Democratic administrations to do the same to vendors for their own political reasons. That’s ultimately why Ted Cruz spoke out about the Kimmel cancelation. It doesn’t take long until those powers are turned against you.

I love when a Republican does something awful the response is "but what about if Democrats do that same awful thing to us!" as opposed to discussing and admitting that the Republicans did something awful.

Oh. Before your comment I completely misunderstood "Democratic administrations". I understood it to mean administrations of countries that are democratic, not an US administration that is dominated by the Democratic party.

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#204

Post by breakpointalpha » Thu, Mar 05, 2026, 9:44 PM UTC

quentindanjou wrote: post #194

stared wrote: post #182

Should it be officially marked as the date of transition from liberal democracy to illiberal democracy? Such tampering with companies is a smoking gun. Let's wait until there is another decision seizing this (or others') company assets.

I always find it interesting to listen US citizen answer "What would it take for you to not consider your country a democracy?" and admire the wide range of answers and denials.

Many proudly and loudly claim the US is a "republic".

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#205

Post by Analemma_ » Thu, Mar 05, 2026, 9:45 PM UTC

pstuart wrote: post #187

netinstructions wrote: post #177

This designation is usually reserved for foreign adversaries/companies, and so this is crazy to apply it to US company over a sudden contract dispute... that was previously agreed upon by all parties. This should make any US company nervous about entering into an agreement with the government. Or any US company that already has a contract with the government. If they one day decide they don't like that contract, they…

> This should make any US company nervous "Nice little business ya got here -- it'd be shame if something happened to it..."

Shame you didn’t donate $25 million to Trump, like the company we decided to give the contract to instead did, who will benefit tremendously from you being designated a supply chain risk. Maybe next time you’ll be a little smarter.

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#206

Post by 1718627440 » Thu, Mar 05, 2026, 9:45 PM UTC

softwaredoug wrote: post #114

germandiago wrote: post #37

This is awful. That a disagreement tjat involves politics can make a company ruined is really awful. The civil society should be quite concerned about this kind of attacks.

It opens the door for Democratic administrations to do the same to vendors for their own political reasons. That’s ultimately why Ted Cruz spoke out about the Kimmel cancelation. It doesn’t take long until those powers are turned against you.

I think we should really judge governments by their actions and stop labeling them democracies, if they do such things that don't look like democracies at all.

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#207

Post by alanwreath » Thu, Mar 05, 2026, 9:46 PM UTC

Labeling Anthropic a supply chain risk only because they were uninterested in doing business with the US government under the terms requested seems very much a bullying tactic that results in something the west critiques China for: coerced alignment.

Anthropic has been given a death sentence.

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#208

Post by 0cf8612b2e1e » Thu, Mar 05, 2026, 9:47 PM UTC

cedws wrote: post #175

estearum wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are quite literally witnessing someone taking a massive hit for not discarding their principles. Evergreen dril: "The wise man bowed his head and said 'there's no difference between good things and bad things you imbecile'"

What's your source for this "massive hit"? All I've seen is a massive PR upside, despite what I said above.

Losing a contract with the Pentagon and potentially all Federal-interacting businesses sounds like a pretty severe monetary hit. One which is hard to recoup by a bunch of $20/month consumer subscriptions.

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#209

Post by wrs » Thu, Mar 05, 2026, 9:48 PM UTC

softwaredoug wrote: post #114

germandiago wrote: post #37

This is awful. That a disagreement tjat involves politics can make a company ruined is really awful. The civil society should be quite concerned about this kind of attacks.

It opens the door for Democratic administrations to do the same to vendors for their own political reasons. That’s ultimately why Ted Cruz spoke out about the Kimmel cancelation. It doesn’t take long until those powers are turned against you.

No it doesn't. As with so many other things this administration does, this door was not open. They bashed through it anyway.

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#210

Post by GaryBluto » Thu, Mar 05, 2026, 9:48 PM UTC

breakpointalpha wrote: post #204

quentindanjou wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always find it interesting to listen US citizen answer "What would it take for you to not consider your country a democracy?" and admire the wide range of answers and denials.

Many proudly and loudly claim the US is a "republic".

Is it not?