Live data from Hacker News

We do not think Anthropic should be designated as a supply chain risk

twitter.com

291–300 of 491 posts

Re: We do not think Anthropic should be designated as a supply chain risk

#291
post #8

From that same X thread: Our agreement with the Department of War upholds our redlines [1] OpenAI has the same redlines as Anthopic based on Altman's statements [2]. However somehow Anthropic gets banished for upholding their redlines and OpenAI ends up with the cash? [1]: https://xcancel.com/OpenAI/status/2027846013650932195#m [2]: https://www.npr.org/2026/02/27/nx-s1-5729118/trump-anthropic...

Sam Altman has no scruples. Dark Triad personality. No reason to believe anything he says.

[dead]

Re: We do not think Anthropic should be designated as a supply chain risk

#292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Only Congress can change the name of a federal department, so the Department of Defense is still properly called that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_14347

Only Congress can declare war but here we are with the department of war bombing a foreign country and capturing and assassinating foreign leaders.

Re: We do not think Anthropic should be designated as a supply chain risk

#293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Boycott OpenAI. Let's kill their business before it kills us.

Don't boycott it! Just don't pay for it. Smash the free service hard.

Active users are worth a lot. It is signal that they are the chosen solution.

Re: We do not think Anthropic should be designated as a supply chain risk

#294
post #290
post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_De... Stoping and questioning why somebody uses DoD or DoW is way more telling than using any of those. Especially that both are perfectly fine, even officially. A square was renamed in my home city about 20 years ago. We still use the original one usually, even teens know that name. I use a form of the original name of our main stadium which was renamed almos…

Or it could have just been a genuine question. I'm not American and I've seen DoW used in newspapers and thought the name change was official. Personally I've thought it a more apt and honest name for what they do. But the backlash in the commments here show how ideologically charged the question seem to be.

I wasn't aware of how ideologically charged the question was. I'm also not American, but I'm glad I made the question. It's a clear sign for us not Americans to just leave them be.

Re: We do not think Anthropic should be designated as a supply chain risk

#295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only Congress can change the name of a federal department, so the Department of Defense is still properly called that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_14347

Only Congress can declare war but here we are with the department of war bombing a foreign country and capturing and assassinating foreign leaders.

That policy changed a long time ago. The last declaration of war was June 4, 1942.

After Vietnam, Congress passed the War Powers Resolution to limit the ability of Presidents to conduct military action without Congressional approval, but it still allows military action for up to 60 days. Every President since then has used that power.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Powers_Resolution

Re: We do not think Anthropic should be designated as a supply chain risk

#296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OpenAI is playing games. When Anthropic says they have red lines, they mean "We refuse to let you use our models for these ends, even if it means losing nearly a billion dollars in business." When OpenAI says they have red lines, they mean "We are going to let the DoD do whatever the hell they want, but we will shake our fist at them while they do it." That's why they got the contract. The DoD was clear about what th…

[flagged]

[deleted]

Re: We do not think Anthropic should be designated as a supply chain risk

#297
post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> OpenAI hires "technical writers" Mind blown. Isn't documentation a prime use case for "AI"?

Have you ever seen the back of your head, without a mirror? Without two mirrors, actually? How can AI accurately describe itself in full?

The problem it has describing itself isn't the lack of a metaphorical mirror, tool use is there and it can grep whatever code or research is written; the problem is that all machine learning is surprisingly slow to update with new info.

Ask ChatGPT to describe itself, you may get valid documentation and API calls, or you may get the API for GPT-3 (not ChatGPT, before that). I have had both happen.

Re: We do not think Anthropic should be designated as a supply chain risk

#300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OpenAI is playing games. When Anthropic says they have red lines, they mean "We refuse to let you use our models for these ends, even if it means losing nearly a billion dollars in business." When OpenAI says they have red lines, they mean "We are going to let the DoD do whatever the hell they want, but we will shake our fist at them while they do it." That's why they got the contract. The DoD was clear about what th…

[flagged]

Perhaps because the latter sounds hilariously childish?
Post reply on HN