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

281–290 of 319 posts

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#281

Post by atoav »

netinstructions wrote: post #177

This designation is usually reserved for foreign adversaries/companies, and so this is crazy to apply it to US company over a sudden contract dispute... that was previously agreed upon by all parties. This should make any US company nervous about entering into an agreement with the government. Or any US company that already has a contract with the government. If they one day decide they don't like that contract, they…

Well. Unsurprisingly fascists will do a fascism – an ideology somewhat defined by merging state and industrial powers. Many economically minded people, many technologists, including in this space, have afforded themselves the luxury of not talking about politics too deeply. As I said some years ago: Ignoring politics has its way of coming back to haunt you. Back then this was an unpopular take.

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#282

Post by bulbar »

netfortius wrote: post #242
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.

What people seem to refuse to accept is that democrats won't have another chance, any time soon. It's done and gone. Count one or two generations, at a minimum, under the new Epstein class regime, before people may try to rise.

If democracy in the US falls apart, it will take an event of World War 3 scale to fix this.

But thinking of it, your estimate might still hold under that premise.

As a European, I have still hopes for the US though. The western world is already reorganizing itself without the US in the center, but we and the world in general still need the US as being more of an ally than an adversary (at the moment, it's more of an adversary to the western world, sadly).

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#283

Post by ssl-3 »

infogulch wrote: post #277
ssl-3 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 suppli…

If I agree to sell widgets to the government that meet certain agreed-upon specifications, and then I elect to forego those earlier agreements and tell them to fuck off, then that's different.

Is that what happened here?

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#284

Post by xvector »

Imustaskforhelp wrote: post #55
AnotherGoodName wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d like a lawyer to give some input. If you have a company that deals with the military does this chain down to not being allowed to use Claude or not?

IANAL and this is my understanding of the situation (I can be completely wrong) but yes, any company that deals with military cant use Claude (anthropic) In fact adding onto it, IIRC this is the reason why google and amazon have to divest essentially from Anthropic if they want Govt. contracts Hope this helps though a lawyer's input will definitely be more credible. So its good for them to respond as well.

You are 100% incorrect, only direct contract work is affected

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#286

Post by rjbwork »

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 ..."

I wasn't speaking about the top of the chain. Merely the last couple of replies about the situation WRT how things are actually operating.

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#287

Post by bdelmas »

mentalgear wrote: post #15

I said it before and I say it again: If openly bribing a crony gov to cancel your competitor is now the de-facto standard of making business in the US, I don't see how any rational investor could still see US companies as a secure investment. When the rule of law degrades into pay-to-play politics, the inevitable result is a mass exodus of both capital and top-tier talent. And to add to this quoting another commentat…

> I don't see how any rational investor could still see US companies as a secure investment

You are right it won’t be as secured as before but it’s only risk management. As much as investing in a oil company in Brazil is a risk because you could have their government takeover the company to make it part of the government and screw you in the process.

It’s still tradable.

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#288

Post by orsenthil »

atoav wrote: post #281
netinstructions wrote: post #177

This designation is usually reserved for foreign adversaries/companies, and so this is crazy to apply it to US company over a sudden contract dispute... that was previously agreed upon by all parties. This should make any US company nervous about entering into an agreement with the government. Or any US company that already has a contract with the government. If they one day decide they don't like that contract, they…

Well. Unsurprisingly fascists will do a fascism – an ideology somewhat defined by merging state and industrial powers. Many economically minded people, many technologists, including in this space, have afforded themselves the luxury of not talking about politics too deeply. As I said some years ago: Ignoring politics has its way of coming back to haunt you. Back then this was an unpopular take.

> Ignoring politics has its way of coming back to haunt you. Back then this was an unpopular take.

Right now, we cannot and should not. Even if you ignore, you are getting dragged into without your choice. See: the bribes paid by the companies.

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#289

Post by jibal »

rjbwork wrote: post #286
jibal wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I wasn't speaking about the top of the chain. Merely the last couple of replies about the situation WRT how things are actually operating.

Well, that's not the way context works and it's dishonest BS. You wrote "You got downvoted a bit but I upvoted. You're clearly being descriptive in your statements, not prescriptive." -- no, they were prescriptive from the start, and the prescription and the goalpost moving and wool-over-eyes pulling is why they were downvoted.

I won't respond further.

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#290

Post by bdangubic »

softwaredoug wrote: post #172
thinkingtoilet wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love when a Republican does something awful the response is "but what about if Democrats do that same awful thing to us!" as opposed to discussing and admitting that the Republicans did something awful.

The only way you convince Republicans it’s awful is by reminding Republicans power can be abused in both directions.

How I wish this was true... Every single time we experience something (and of course lately it feels like a daily experience) I would be in a discussion at some point with a Republican and would come with super-solid counter-examples like "imagine 2029 and President AOC doing ____" - it just never works...
Post reply on HN