Live data from Hacker News

Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

wsj.com

301–310 of 319 posts

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#301
post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah how could Anthropic do business with the democratically elected government of the United States?

Let‘s ignore all the bad things they have done since that, including killing two US citizens.

Two white Americans, they've killed multiple other citizens.

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#302

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.

“Concerned” is an understatement. USA is already operating at nazi Germany levels and more than half of the civil society is approving. Not that it’s a surprise for global spectators though - it’s finally showing it’s true colors.

More than half is an exaggeration. Trump is not a popular president. With free and fair elections, a blue wave is more or less guaranteed

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#304

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.

I think we should really judge governments by their actions and stop labeling them democracies, if they do such things that don't look like democracies at all.

We already do that, but we're just selective about it. After all, how many modern autocratic nations identify themselves as undemocratic?

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#305
post #183
post #69

So, DoD has done what it said it would. And OpenAI has jumped on the opportunity. I'm curious what'll openai signatories on notdivided.org do now - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47188473 Remain undivided in spirit while grinding for OpenAI?

Congress must approve any renaming the Department of Defense ... They haven't. Stop giving them what they want without them even doing it in good faith at all. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_De...

Pretty ironic because for once, they went with the more accurate description instead of the euphemisms. It's no longer "protecting freedom of speech" or "ending wars," just full-on bombings and invasions with glee.

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#306
post #271

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 thei…

I don't get the impression Anthropic tried to walk anything back, they just balked when they were informed that the DoD wasn't willing to abide by their terms to refrain from using Claude for surveillance or straight up selecting targets to kill. But you're right that means Anthropic's hands are not exactly clean, just less bloody than OpenAI's or xAI's

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#307

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…

I was sympathetic to this line of reasoning but I feel it's repeatedly shown to be self-defeating.

What chance have the proverbial good-guys got if, even after _proving_ some modicum of good will, people will nonetheless condescend any attempt to influence bad/wildcard actors? It feels great to tell someone they 'should've known better' but I'm convinced that that's basically void of cautionary utility.

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#308

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…

> This should make any US company nervous about entering into an agreement with the government

I'm pretty sure same thing would've happened if Anthropic refused to enter contract negotiations in the first place.

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#309

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…

I've commented this in a different thread, but pretty sure something very similar would've happened in they refused to "get into bed with the military or intelligence services to begin with".

It's damned if you do and damned if you don't — lose-lose scenario either way.

Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk

#310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Concerned” is an understatement. USA is already operating at nazi Germany levels and more than half of the civil society is approving. Not that it’s a surprise for global spectators though - it’s finally showing it’s true colors.

More than half is an exaggeration. Trump is not a popular president. With free and fair elections, a blue wave is more or less guaranteed

All the more reason for Trump to prevent any form of free and fair elections then.
Post reply on HN