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

Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 319 posts

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#271

Post by 6thbit »

blacksmith_tb wrote: post #216

A bit ironic then that they're actively using Claude in the current war effort[1]. 1: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/anthropic-claude-ai-iran-war-u-...

This is also the part i don't get. People flocking over to pay anthropic which _has already been used in a war_ and cancelling existing subs to a provider that has not yet but will?

Ethical boundaries seem difficult to draw here. I don't really see people taking the stance of "No longer paying any of them" which would make a bit more sense to me.

Anthropic already had layed in bed with pentagon, how did that fit their overall ethical standpoint as they were already being used and before they tried to walk back their terms?

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#272

Post by 6thbit »

parliament32 wrote: post #149

Is there a link to the actual order anywhere? For us FedRAMP folks, the exact order contents actually matter, rather than a journalistic regurgitation. I was hoping one of the links in the article pointed to a source, but they're all just links back to other WSJ pages.

Most corps will take the safer bet of not using them at all to prevent "accidental" miscompliance and more expensive audits. I'd bet if you need fedramp compliance you'll get forced out of their products generically.

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#273

Post by 6thbit »

karteum wrote: post #265

Could Anthropic consider to relocate in Europe ? ;)

As much as I'd really like to see one of these labs in EU, they are likely way too tied to US capital and supply-chain of semis/services. If they move away and now have to also deal with export restrictions they may make their existence harder.

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#274

Post by stonecharioteer »

mitthrowaway2 wrote: post #188
Chance-Device wrote: post #146

Anthropic should never have gotten into bed with the military or intelligence services to begin with. They wanted to make a deal with the devil and dictate the terms, that is the problem. If they had stayed out this wouldn’t be happening. Yes, someone else will probably step in and do all the evil you have just refused to do, but that isn’t a reason to instead decide to do it personally. Note that I give them a lot o…

According to legend the devil adheres precisely to the terms of the contacts he signs; it's usually the foolhardy peasant who didn't notice the fine print.

Very useful if you run into him in Georgia or if you want to get his tooth to make a guitar pick.

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#275

Post by jemmyw »

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 a good play by the Democrats would be to say that if they get into office they're going to investigate all these deals as potential bribery, fraud and corruption and that any business leaders that appeared to benefit from contributions might be prosecuted. That would be a laugh, I'd love to see how quickly the excuses start rolling in.

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#276

Post by Hizonner »

stared wrote: post #251
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.

If civil society is not concerned by the tribute-based Board of Peace that gladly invited Putin, an attack on another country without authorization by Congress, a threat to seize the land of an ally, and the killing of its own citizens by the ICE militia, then an unjustified supply-chain risk label won't cut it.

I don't know. There's a certain segment of "civil society" that's pretty much OK with anything as long as it doesn't threaten the Holy Free Market. Free only for appropriately holy values of "free", mind you...

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#277

Post by infogulch »

ssl-3 wrote: post #117
infogulch wrote: post #92

The US Military's demand that the product they purchase is able to be used for all lawful purposes seems pretty reasonable, and is really the only valid line to draw. Forcing one's own ethics onto the military's use of your product is nonsensical on its face.

If I produce and sell widgets in my widget shop, then nobody but me gets to decide how I make those widgets. The government can come into my shop and order sixty thousand widgets built exactly the way they say they want them built, and it may be something that doesn't run afoul of any laws at all. But that doesn't mean that I am required or compelled to build widgets their way -- or at all. I'm free to tell them to f…

Yes but then the government can decide that the widget, which can suddenly and arbitrarily break and cause havoc because it doesn't work according to the government's desired spec, is risky to use and advise their other vendors to avoid it. And now we've caught up to today's story.

So we agree that everything is fine here, and that the only unreasonable position is that the military should pay for or endorse a supplier that tells the military to "fuck off". Yes?

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#278

Post by arppacket »

scottyah wrote: post #225
eikenberry wrote: post #132

Could this be the chain of events that finally pops the AI bubble? If OpenAI's reputation hit slows growth enough to scare off investors and Anthropic's growth stalls due to this government attack...

I think it's a good chance tbh. It would take the S&P down with it too

Of course it's going to be this government that goes and pokes the bubble that's propping up the economy, despite all the government's other shenanigans.

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#279

Post by Sabinus »

JeremyNT wrote: post #240
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.

> That’s ultimately why Ted Cruz spoke out about the Kimmel cancelation. It doesn’t take long until those powers are turned against you. Meh, I think it's entirely asymmetrical in this era. Democrats aren't good for much, but they're very good at respecting norms. Trump is willing to do completely unprecedented, vindictive, and malicious things because he's so popular with so many people who are either checked out, n…

Like gerrymandering, I have the strong suspicion that Trump voters won't be incentivised to vote for norm respecting leaders until a Dem does very Trumpian things to their side. I'm thinking firm 2nd Amendment reform enforcement with a rapidly resourced federal agency. Then, standards will be rapidly rediscovered.

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#280

Post by mrtksn »

jibal wrote: post #269
rjbwork wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You got downvoted a bit but I upvoted. You're clearly being descriptive in your statements, not prescriptive. I tend to agree that this is how things are now. Our country is not being run by the rule of law right now.

Wrong ... their very first words were "Isn’t it actually quite fair ..."

Within the context provided…. You should consider reading the whole argument.
Post reply on HN