Live data from Hacker News

We Will Not Be Divided

notdivided.org

261–270 of 912 posts

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like you think that Anthropic is the first company regulating the use of their product. This is not a novelty whatsoever.

No, but I find it obnoxious as an end user.

These models will be able to run on a machine in your pocket locally within a few decades.

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#262
post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the bigger insanity here is the labeling of a supply chain risk. It prohibits DoD agencies and contractors from using Anthropic services. It'd be one thing if the DoD simply didn't use Anthropic. It's another when it actively attempts to isolate Anthropic for political reasons.

> It prohibits DoD agencies and contractors from using Anthropic services. It'd be one thing if the DoD simply didn't use Anthropic. This is literally the mechanism by which the DoD does what you're suggesting. Generally speaking, the DoD has to do procurement via competitive bidding. They can't just arbitrarily exclude vendors from a bid, and playing a game of "mother may I use Anthropic?" for every potential govern…

You're making it sound like this is commonly practiced and a standard procedure for the DoD, yet according to Anthropic,

>Designating Anthropic as a supply chain risk would be an unprecedented action—one historically reserved for US adversaries, never before publicly applied to an American company.

Some very brief googling also confirmed this for me too.

>Everyone is fixated on the name of the rule (and to be fair: the administration is emphasizing that name for irritating rhetorical reasons), but if they called it the "DoD vendor exclusion list", it would be more accurate.

This statement misses the point. The political punishment to disallow all US agencies and gov contractors from using Anthropic for _any _ purpose, not just domestic spying, IS the retaliation, and is the very thing that's concerning. Calling it "DoD vendor exclusion list" or whatever other placating phrase or term doesn't change the action.

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#263
post #130

Here's the sequence (so far) in reverse order - did I miss any important threads? Statement 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 governm…

Altman says OpenAI agrees with Anthropic’s red lines in Pentagon dispute - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47187488 - Feb 2026 (8 comments)

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#264
post #255
post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but we could have Hetzners and OVHs who just provide the compute for whatever model we want to run.

Checked the DDR5 price lately?

I didn’t claim that it would be cheap. But I’d rather see the real cost of SOTA LLM use exposed. On the other hand, reportedly SOTA LLM inference is profitable nowadays, so it can’t be that expensive.

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#265
post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn’t sound right. Surely there’s a big difference between Anthropic selling the government direct access to its models, and an unrelated contractor that sells pencils to the government and happens to use Anthropic’s services to help write the code for their website.

> Surely there’s a big difference between Anthropic selling the government direct access to its models, and an unrelated contractor that sells pencils to the government and happens to use Anthropic’s services to help write the code for their website. Yes, this is the part where I acknowledge that it might be overreach in my original comment, but it's not nearly as extreme or obvious as the debate rhetoric is implying…

MIGHT be overreach to call this a supply chain risk?!? That is absolutely ludicrous.

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#266
post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I find it funny how we're now defending these AI companies, when they're clearly still an enemy of the working class. They've made it incredibly clear their plans are to disenfranchise labor, and welcome in a world of God knows what with their technologies. Like they're making a stand on mass surveillance, this seems a bit like a red herring, cool they stop using their tools for war fighting, but continue to at…

I look at specific actions in context. What Anthropic did today was amazing in my eyes for reasons that are widely held and stated clearly by Anthropic. At the same time, I might gesture at other actions they’ve done that fall short. This is not inconsistent; this is simply acknowledging miltidimensionality.

Or its just incredible marketing.. I don't really care about what LLMs do in a military context, they'd probably make a military less effective which is good in my opinion. I find it a pretty silly notion to use them outside of maybe signals intelligence, seems actually dumb as hell to use them for targeting. Other types of ML models in a military context worry me far more than neural network powered autocomplete.

I think we should worry way more about Anthropic's attack on the working class, Dario has been very clear those intentions, and we shouldn't be patting them on the back. We should be boycotting all of these companies that say [insert computer i/o career] is dead .

If you must use Think For Me SaaS use an Open Source model.

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#267
post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how public policy is being "forced" on anyone here? It seems like the system is working as intended: government wants to do X; company A says "I won't allow my product to be used for X"; government refuses to do business with company A. One side thinks the government should be allowed to dictate terms to a private supplier, the other side thinks the private supplier should be allowed to dictate terms to t…

I think the bigger insanity here is the labeling of a supply chain risk. It prohibits DoD agencies and contractors from using Anthropic services. It'd be one thing if the DoD simply didn't use Anthropic. It's another when it actively attempts to isolate Anthropic for political reasons.

It means that all companies contracting with the government have to certify that they don't use Anthropic products at all. Not just in the products being offered to the government.

This is a massive body slam. This means that Nvidia, every server vendor, IBM, AWS, Azure, Microsoft and everybody else has to certify that they don't do business directly or indirectly using Anthropic products.

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#269
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who cares whether the "company" survives? I've seen this movie. A few of them in fact. We're on the chopping block here, lol.

We should care because if they win they empower others to stand up as well, and not just in the area of AI safety. Courage is contagious, and whatever else you think of Anthropic, they’re showing real courage here.

I'm not debating whether or not they're being courageous. I'm referring to self-preservation, this is a natural instinct that should be in all people. Have you seen T2? District 9? The Matrix? And a few others I could mention.

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#270
post #216
post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It stop any one with government contracts from using anthropic. Not just bidding on government contracts.

[flagged]

No. It is much more than this.

If I sell red widgets that I make by hand to the government, I won't be allowed to use Anthropic to help me write my web-site.

Post reply on HN