Statement on the comments from Secretary of War Pete Hegseth

Post by ModernMech » Sat, Feb 28, 2026, 5:47 AM UTC

kyle-rb wrote: post #164

dmix wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This administration has repeatedly shown it will try to bully or take an outrageous negotiating position just to gain featly. Whether they get anything or whether the dispute is actually what the label says should always be treated with skepticism, especially these days with social media information wars. That’s the benefit of realpolitik when you’re a superpower, you often don’t actually need anything, you can just…

It seems like they'd have a stronger negotiating position if they had an alternative contractor waiting in the wings before they accused Anthropic of being woke traitors, as opposed to a threat to migrate away over the next 6 months. But again, the sophistication of their strategery might also have a negative correlation with Hegseth's BAC.

Post by twelvechairs » Sat, Feb 28, 2026, 5:52 AM UTC

clutter55561 wrote: post #241

lich_king wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My lived experience with tech companies is that principles are easy when they're free - i.e., when you're telling others what to do, or taking principled stances when a competitor is not breathing down your neck. So, with all respect, when someone tells me that the people they worked with were well-intentioned and driven by values, I take it with a grain of salt. Been there, said the same things, and then when the co…

HN is pretty polarised about this - they are either “the good guys” or “doing it for positive marketing”. I’m on the camp “the world is so fucked up, take the good when you can find it”. Beggars can’t be choosers when it comes to taking a stand against dictatorships.

Post by ajam1507 » Sat, Feb 28, 2026, 5:55 AM UTC

skissane wrote: post #280

ajam1507 wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> However, in this instance, it does seem that Anthropic is walking away from money. The supply chain risk designation will be overturned in court, and the financial fallout from losing the government contracts will pale in comparison to the goodwill from consumers. Not to mention that giving in would mean they lose lots of their employees who would refuse to work under those terms. In this case, the principles are l…

> The supply chain risk designation will be overturned in court, I'm honestly uncertain how the courts will rule. You could be right, but it isn't guaranteed. I think a judicial narrowing of it is more likely than a complete overturn. OTOH, I think almost guaranteed it will be watered-down by the government. Because read expansively, it could force Microsoft and AWS to choose between stopping reselling Claude vs drop…

Post by astrolx » Sat, Feb 28, 2026, 6:03 AM UTC

Post by ilaksh » Sat, Feb 28, 2026, 6:06 AM UTC

dmix wrote: post #61

parl_match wrote: post #7

Anthropic's stance here is admirable. If nothing else, their acknowledgement of not being able to predict how these powerful technologies can be abused is a bold and intelligent position to take.

It’s not just admirable it’s the obvious position to take and any alternative is head scratching. It’s clear that this is mostly a glorified loyalty test over a practical ask by the administration. Strangely reminiscent of Soviet or Chinese policies where being agreeable to authority was more important than providing value to the state.