Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

Post by howardYouGood » Fri, Feb 27, 2026, 1:00 AM UTC

bnr-ais wrote: post #252

lebovic wrote: post #202

I used to work at Anthropic, and I wrote a comment on a thread earlier this week about the RSP update [1]. It's enheartening to see that leaders at Anthropic are willing to risk losing their seat at the table to be guided by values. Something I don't think is well understood on HN is how driven by ideals many folks at Anthropic are, even if the company is pragmatic about achieving their goals. I have strong signal th…

Anthropic had the largest IP settlement ($1.5 billion) for stolen material and Amodei repeatedly predicted mass unemployment within 6 months due to AI. Without being bothered about it at all. It is a horrible and ruthless company and hearing a presumably rich ex-employee painting a rosy picture does not change anything.

Post by MichaelZuo » Fri, Feb 27, 2026, 1:00 AM UTC

sowbug wrote: post #255

MichaelZuo wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you reconcile the fact that many people in Anthropic tried to hide the existence of secret non-disparagement agreements for quite some time? It’s hard to take your comment at face value when there’s documented proof to the contrary. Maybe it could be forgiven as a blunder if revealed in the first few months and within the first handful of employees… but after 2 plus years and many dozens forced to sign that… i…

Saying an entity has values doesn't mean the entity agrees with every single one of your values.

Post by FrankBooth » Fri, Feb 27, 2026, 1:02 AM UTC

krapp wrote: post #13

alangibson wrote: post #4

It's not named the Department of War because Congress didn't rename it. Other than that, good on ya.

It is called the Department of War because we live under fascism and Congress no longer matters. All that matters is that everyone calls it the Department of War, and regards it as such, which everyone does.

Post by howardYouGood » Fri, Feb 27, 2026, 1:04 AM UTC

jamesmcq wrote: post #199

qaid wrote: post #62

I was reading halfway thru and one line struck a nerve with me: > But today, frontier AI systems are simply not reliable enough to power fully autonomous weapons. So not today, but the door is open for this after AI systems have gathered enough "training data"? Then I re-read the previous paragraph and realized it's specifically only criticizing > AI-driven domestic mass surveillance And neither denounces partially a…

So AI systems are not reliable enough to power fully autonomous weapons but they are reliable enough to end all white-collar work in the next 12 months? Odd.

Post by shinryuu » Fri, Feb 27, 2026, 1:05 AM UTC

scottyah wrote: post #223

altpaddle wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately I think the writing is clearly on the wall. Fully autonomous weapons are coming soon

It's only Anthropic with their current models saying no. Fully autonomous weapons have been created, deployed, and have been operational for a long time already. The only holdout I've ever heard of is for the weapons that target humans. Honestly, even landmines could easily be considered fully autonomous weapons and they don't care if you're human or not.