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

OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 702 posts

Re: OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network

#251

Post by xvector »

impulser_ wrote: post #153

For the people that don't understand how they got a deal with the same redlines, it probably because OpenAI agreed to not question them. The safeguards are there, both parties agree now fuck off and let us use your model how we see fit. Anthropic probably made the mistake of questioning the Military's activities related to Claude after the Venezuela mission and wanted reassurance that the model wouldn't be used for t…

> I don't think they will keep the supply chain risk on Anthropic for more than a week.

Why? It is in the admin's interest to absolutely destroy Anthropic. Make them an example.

Re: OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network

#252

Post by throwawaywd89e »

tedsanders wrote: post #220
Imnimo wrote: post #16

I don't see how OpenAI employees who have signed the We Will Not Be Divided letter can continue their employment there in light of this. Surely if OpenAI had insisted upon the same things that Anthropic had, the government would not have signed this agreement. The only plausible explanation is that there is an understanding that OpenAI will not, in practice, enforce the red lines.

I'm an OpenAI employee and I'll go out on a limb with a public comment. I agree AI shouldn't be used for mass surveillance or autonomous weapons. I also think Anthropic has been treated terribly and has acted admirably. My understanding is that the OpenAI deal disallows domestic mass surveillance and autonomous weapons, and that OpenAI is asking for the same terms for other AI companies (so that we can continue compe…

"AI shouldn't be used for mass surveillance or autonomous weapons". The statement from OpenAI virtually guarantees that the intention is to use it for mass surveillance and autonomous weapons. If this wasn't the intention them the qualifier "domestic" wouldn't be used, and they would be talking about "human in the loop" control of autonomous weapons, not "human responsibility" which just means there's someone willing to stand up and say, "yep I take responsibility for the autonomous weapon systems actions", which lets be honest is the thinnest of thin safety guarantees.

Re: OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network

#253

Post by cedws »

blueblisters wrote: post #154

My knee-jerk reaction to this was looks like an opportunistic maneuver that Sam is known for and I'm considering canceling my subscriptions and business with OpenAI But what's the most charitable / objective interpretation of this? For example - https://x.com/UnderSecretaryF/status/2027594072811098230 Does it suggest that determination of "lawful use" and Dario's concerns falls upon the government, not the AI provide…

I think Altman probably rationalised it to himself by thinking that if he doesn’t do it, Musk/xAI will, and they give zero fucks about safety. So maybe he told himself that it’s better if OpenAI does it.

Re: OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network

#255

Post by spongebobstoes »

Analemma_ wrote: post #167
blueblisters wrote: post #154

My knee-jerk reaction to this was looks like an opportunistic maneuver that Sam is known for and I'm considering canceling my subscriptions and business with OpenAI But what's the most charitable / objective interpretation of this? For example - https://x.com/UnderSecretaryF/status/2027594072811098230 Does it suggest that determination of "lawful use" and Dario's concerns falls upon the government, not the AI provide…

As people have repeatedly mentioned, if the War Department was unhappy with Anthropic's terms, they could have refused to sign the contract. But they didn't: they were fine with it for over a year. And if they changed their mind, they could've ended the contract and both sides could've walked away. Anthropic said that would've been fine. But that's not what happened either: they threatened Anthropic with both SCR des…

it seems like oai deal does include the same red lines, plus some more, and the ability for oai to deploy safety systems to limit the use cases of the model via technical means

this seems strictly better than what anthropic had. anthropic has ruined their relationship with the US govt, giving oai a good negotiating hand

the oai folks are good at making deals, just look at all the complex funding arrangements they have

Re: OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network

#256

Post by westjerry35 »

cube00 wrote: post #28

If the redlines are the same how'd this deal get struck? ChatGPT maker OpenAI has the same redlines as Anthropic when it comes to working with the Pentagon, an OpenAI spokesperson confirmed to CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2026/02/27/tech/openai-has-same-redl...

[flagged]

Re: OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network

#257

Post by matsemann »

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #204
WD-42 wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure it's a matter of interpretation. Anthropic thinks the DoW's demands will lead to mass surveillance and auto-kill bots. The DoW probably disagrees with that interpretation, and all OpenAI needs to do is agree with the DoW. My bet is that what the DoW wants is pretty clearly tied to mass surveillance and kill-bots. Altman is a snake.

Why do you choose to call it the "DoW"? Its official name is the Department of Defense, it was titled that way by Congress and only Congress can change it. What is your motivation in using a term that the current administration has started to use? Do you also use the Gulf of America when referrring to the body of water that defines the southern edge of the USA?

It's the term used by Sam Altman in the announcement. Maybe aim your anger there, to someone knowingly helping them in their attempt to turn the department into one of aggression.

Re: OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network

#258

Post by spongebobstoes »

cube00 wrote: post #28

If the redlines are the same how'd this deal get struck? ChatGPT maker OpenAI has the same redlines as Anthropic when it comes to working with the Pentagon, an OpenAI spokesperson confirmed to CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2026/02/27/tech/openai-has-same-redl...

deals are based on personal relationships, not abstract logic

Re: OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network

#259

Post by kaashif »

tedsanders wrote: post #220
Imnimo wrote: post #16

I don't see how OpenAI employees who have signed the We Will Not Be Divided letter can continue their employment there in light of this. Surely if OpenAI had insisted upon the same things that Anthropic had, the government would not have signed this agreement. The only plausible explanation is that there is an understanding that OpenAI will not, in practice, enforce the red lines.

I'm an OpenAI employee and I'll go out on a limb with a public comment. I agree AI shouldn't be used for mass surveillance or autonomous weapons. I also think Anthropic has been treated terribly and has acted admirably. My understanding is that the OpenAI deal disallows domestic mass surveillance and autonomous weapons, and that OpenAI is asking for the same terms for other AI companies (so that we can continue compe…

Anthropic is deemed a betrayer and a supply chain risk for actually enforcing their principles.

OpenAI agrees to be put in the same position as Anthropic.

It seems like you must actually somehow believe that history will repeat itself, Hegseth will deem OpenAI a supply chain risk too, then move to Grok or something?

There's surely no way that's actually what you believe...

Re: OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network

#260

Post by Tepix »

advisedwang wrote: post #173
quantumwannabe wrote: post #118

More details on the difference between the OpenAI and Anthropic contracts from one of the Under Secretaries of State: >The axios article doesn’t have much detail and this is DoW’s decision, not mine. But if the contract defines the guardrails with reference to legal constraints (e.g. mass surveillance in contravention of specific authorities) rather than based on the purely subjective conditions included in Anthropic…

A government promise that they'll only do lawful things is not reassuring at all: 1. We've seen government lawyers write memos explaining why such-and-such obviously illegal act is legal (see: torture memo). Until challenged, this is basically law. 2. We've seen government change the law to make whatever they want legal (see: patriot act) 3. We've seen courts just interpret laws to make things legal A contractor does…

This is it exactly.
Post reply on HN