361–370 of 716 posts
[flagged]
Public benefit corporations in the AI space have become a farce at this point. They're just regular corporations wearing a different hat, driven by the same money dynamics as any other corp. They have no ability to balance their stated "mission" with their drive for profit. When being "evil" is profitable and not-evil is not, guess which road they'll take...
Hopefully this is the short-term move made only under duress so that they can file a lawsuit.
> The policy change is separate and unrelated to Anthropic’s discussions with the Pentagon, according to a source familiar with the matter.
Public benefit corporations in the AI space have become a farce at this point. They're just regular corporations wearing a different hat, driven by the same money dynamics as any other corp. They have no ability to balance their stated "mission" with their drive for profit. When being "evil" is profitable and not-evil is not, guess which road they'll take...
This was under duress that government was going to use emergency act to force them anyway. I kind of wish they had forced the governments hand and made them do it. Just to show the public how much interference is going on. They say it wasn't related. Like every thing that has happened across tech/media, the company is forced to do something, then issues statement about 'how it wasn't related to the obvious thing the…
Always the same "Do no evil" tragedy, don't believe in corporations.
What if we start a company with "Always Be Evilin'?" Then gradually over time convert to "Don't be evil" * * Our shareholders will probably sue us
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Katie Sweeten, a former liaison for the Justice Department to the Department of Defense, said she’s not sure how the Pentagon can both declare a company to be a supply chain risk and compel that same company to work with the military. Makes perfect sense!!
Regardless of any specifics, I don't see any contradiction. If a company is deemed a "supply chain risk" it makes perfect sense to compel it to work with the military, assuming the latter will compel them to fix the issues that make them such a risk.
It is not about disciplining them to get better.
1. So one option is about forcing them to produce something. You must build this for us.
2 The other option is saying they are compromised so stop using them all together. We will not use what you build for us at all because we don't trust it.
So . Contradictory.
Of course they do. You would have to be delusional to think that they won't, at some point.
I know the Department of War wanted them to drop some features. Is this the response?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Correct, the US is one of the few countries that tries to collect (Federal) income tax from all citizens regardless of the country they are currently living in. To be fair, when you can prove that income is entirely foreign (not a single US company in the chain of ownership) that income becomes almost entirely deductible and the tax reporting essentially just a census on how well US citizens are doing from an income…
Minor correction, expat income is deductible up to (currently) $130k under the FEIE. After that it's taxes as usual. There's also an array of other mandatory forms like FBAR for foreign accounts, and the nightmare that is form 5471, with absolutely wild allowances for the IRS to impose penalties, often with no statute of limitations and per-violation fines. For example, a US citizen with multiple bank accounts and a…