Live data from Hacker News

Dario Amodei calls OpenAI’s messaging around military deal ‘straight up lies’

techcrunch.com

281–290 of 461 posts

Re: Dario Amodei calls OpenAI’s messaging around military deal ‘straight up lies’

#281
post #189

It's easy to frame this purely as an ethical battle, but there's a massive financial reality here. Training frontier models requires astronomical amounts of capital, and the DOD is one of the few entities with deep enough pockets to fund the next generation of compute. Anthropic turning down this Pentagon contract over safety disagreements is a huge gamble. They are essentially betting that the enterprise market will…

> It's easy to frame this purely as an ethical battle, but there's a massive financial reality here. As opposed to all those famous ethical battles where there's nothing in it for you to do the wrong thing?

Based on OP's comment history, 50/50 chance AI wrote that...

Re: Dario Amodei calls OpenAI’s messaging around military deal ‘straight up lies’

#283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> OAI conditions were basically "DoW won't do anything which violates the rules DoW sets for itself." I believe this understanding is correct. The issue many people have these days with Dept. of War, and most of Trump admin is that they have little respect for laws. They only follow the ones they like and openly ignore the ones that are inconvenient. Dept of "War" should have zero problems agreeing to the two conditi…

[flagged]

With the way you've phrased it the government could nuke the entire world; all of the adversaries would be dead along with literally everyone else. I don't really see why it's an issue if a company doesn't want to sell them the tools to do that.

Re: Dario Amodei calls OpenAI’s messaging around military deal ‘straight up lies’

#284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And why would they have an objection to that? They sold a product to a customer. They should have no business in how that customer uses their software.

I'd hate to break it to you, but companies do have a right to determine how their products are used. You were subject to that when you wrote that comment. Did you not notice that?

No, I do not think they do. If a buy a car a run somebody over on purpose, the manufacturer has no right to come take my car away. Even if it were to be written in a contract.

Re: Dario Amodei calls OpenAI’s messaging around military deal ‘straight up lies’

#285
post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

With the way you've phrased it the government could nuke the entire world; all of the adversaries would be dead along with literally everyone else. I don't really see why it's an issue if a company doesn't want to sell them the tools to do that.

On the flipside, housing prices would go down significantly. Lots of room to expand.

Re: Dario Amodei calls OpenAI’s messaging around military deal ‘straight up lies’

#286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My conception is that the world would be a much simpler place if war was total. No one would start it unless it would be 200% it could win it. And we would all go through military training just in case, you know, a neighbor drank too much last night and thinks it can win against you. > The threat of violence is much more powerful than actually committing violence. While I agree with this statement, the only way the t…

Re: My conception is that the world would be a much simpler place if war was total. No one would start it unless it would be 200% it could win it Now apply the same logic to the current Iran war.

I do not see Iran winning this. The current government is also hated by the people who would very much like to see all of them dead.

Al Jazeera has some very good insights into this, and the gist of it is: the Iranian regime is in a fight for its life with nothing to lose. If they are degraded enough, a revolution will start in Iran and they will be killed by the people. Or by US/IL bombs - whichever comes first. There is no way they get out of this alive. They are trying to prolong the inevitable.

Re: Dario Amodei calls OpenAI’s messaging around military deal ‘straight up lies’

#287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The problem here is that this department claims its adversaries are Americans. Do you think antropic should aid in the killing of Americans?

I don’t believe for a second the Pentagon sees Americans as adversaries.

Re: Dario Amodei calls OpenAI’s messaging around military deal ‘straight up lies’

#288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reportedly, Anthropic didn't know about Claude's role in capturing Maduro until they saw it on the headlines.

And why would they have an objection to that? They sold a product to a customer. They should have no business in how that customer uses their software.

It’s a bit more complex than that, but to be fair I don’t know what they were expecting after they integrated a purpose-built model with Palantir to be deployed in high-security networks to carry out classified tasks.

Re: Dario Amodei calls OpenAI’s messaging around military deal ‘straight up lies’

#289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not "just" a $200m contract, it's the start of a lucrative relationship 1. Stargate seemed to require a dedicated press conference by the President to achieve funding targets. Why risk that level of politicization if it didn't? 2. Greg Brockman donated $25mil to Trump MAGA Super PAC last year. Why risk so much political backlash for a low leverage return of $200m on $25m spent? 3. During WW2, military spend shot…

First, I have to say I loved your thoughtful & detailed comment. You have clearly considered this from the financial side; let me add some color from the perspective of someone working with frontier researchers. > As the "alignment" folks on the AI industry are likely to learn I will push back here. Dario & co are not starry-eyed naive idealists as implied. This is a calculated decision to maximize their goal (safe A…

> researchers are more valuable than any military spend or any datacenter. It does not matter how many hundreds of billions you have - if the 500-1000 top researchers don't want to work for you, you're fucked; and if they do, you will win because these are the people that come up with the step-change improvements in capability.

This is a massive cope imo. The reason that the AI industry is so incestuous is just because there are only a handful of frontier labs with the compute/capital to run large training clusters.

Most of the improvements that we’ve seen in the past 3 years are due to significantly better hardware and software, just boring and straightforward engineering work, not brilliant model architecture improvements. We are running transformers from 2017. The brilliant researchers at the frontier labs have not produced a successor architecture in nearly a decade of trying. That’s not what winning on research looks like.

Have there been some step-change improvements? Sure. But by far the biggest improvement can be attributed to training bigger models on more badass hardware, and hardware availability to serve it cheaply. To act like the DoD isn’t going to be able to stand up pytorch or vllm and get a decent result is hilarious: the reason you use slurm and MPI and openshmem is because national labs and DoD were using it first. NCCL is just gpu accelerated scope-reduced MPI. nvshmem is just gpu accelerated scope-reduced openshmem.

If anything, DoD doesn’t have the inference throughput requirements that the unicorns have and might just be able to immediately outperform them by training a massive dense model without optimizing for time to first token or throughput. They don’t have to worry about if the $/1M tokens makes it economically feasible to serve, which is a primary consideration of the unicorns today when they’re choosing their parameter counts. They can just rate limit the endpoint and share it, with a 2 hour queue time.

The government invented HPC, it’s their world and you’re just playing in it.

> Generally, the defense crowd have a somewhat inflated sense of self worth.

/eyeroll but nobody can do what you do!

Re: Dario Amodei calls OpenAI’s messaging around military deal ‘straight up lies’

#290
post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did the nsa's spying on everyone change between democratic and republican governments?

Did you vote in the primaries for a candidate that might change it?

Did democrats offer primaries in the last elections?

Did voting for Bernie Sanders in the last two primaries (especially the ones when Trump won for the first time) amount to anything?

I wonder how long can the American public keep the self delusion that the elections are anything but a theater for the naive, to keep the pretense the public has any say in things that matter.

How much has the current administration asked the public about going to war with Iran?

Post reply on HN