Why does everyone associated with this administration sound like a 17 year old who got dumped when they post on twitter.
[deleted]
I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk
371–380 of 1001 posts
Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk
#372Sam Altman says OpenAI shares Anthropic's red lines in Pentagon fight [1]
So OpenAI will also be marked as a supply chain risk too, right?
[1]: https://www.axios.com/2026/02/27/altman-openai-anthropic-pen...
Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk
#373There is clearly a need to codify into all of these historical acts that they can't be invoked unless there is a declaration of war (or some other appropriate prerequisite).
This administration consistently exploits what were designed to be emergency powers because no such requirement exists. Leave no room for interpretation.
Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk
#374Earlier quoted context omitted.
Elon has agreed to all demands and can’t wait for gigahitler to take the reigns. I swear there is no room for good guys in this is there.
The military already has access to Grok, but doesn't want it, because it's an inferior model, even compared to open source ones. So the military would probably choose to replace supply chain risk Claude with Qwen or Kimi before Grok.
Grok is according to most benchmarks pretty close to SOTA. It is where the leaders were just a few weeks ago.
Which exactly is best changes on almost a weekly basis as different companies tweak their best model. I doubt the military would want to be switching supplier every week.
Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk
#375It may not be obvious. But this is actually a good thing when we looking back in a few years. I always feel weird that executive branch can just destroy private enterprise with "Supply-chain Risk" / "Terrorist List" without Due Process.
It's basically legal hacking.
Hacking is using a system in a way it was not intended to be used.
Here it is that, but applied to the law.
Hegseth and friends are a bunch of black hat legal hackers.
Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk
#376Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk
#377https://x.com/PalmerLuckey/status/2027500334999081294 It is an interesting point. What's the difference between this use license and others?
It's perfectly reasonable for the US government to end the contract if they no longer like the terms they agreed to (assuming the contract does in fact let them); it's not reasonable to destroy the counterparty to the contract in retaliation. The line "I am altering the deal; pray I don't alter it further" is literally spoken by Darth Vader, the most comic-book of comic-book villains.
Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk
#378Topics like this are where I struggle with HN philosophy. Normally avoiding politics and ideology where possible, created higher quality and more interesting discussions. But how do you even begin to discuss that Tweet or this topic without talking about ideology and to contextualize this with other seemingly unrelated things currently going on in the US? I genuinely don't think I'm conversationally agile enough to b…
If the last ten years have taught us anything it's that politics just isn't a topic isolated to the halls of government. It's real life. Political alignment has never so starkly indicative of your position on fundamental human morality. At the same time we've never had a government be so directly involved in private businesses.
Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk
#379Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Purpose of a System is WHAT IT DOES!
https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/come-on-obviously-the-purpo...
Wow that post is bad. The author clearly never actually attempted to understand what POSWID actually means and where it is coming from. Perhaps, instead of looking at Twitter, they should have opened Wikipedia. Or, better yet, Stafford Beers books (though admittedly, he was a pretty atrocious writer).
The follow-up is slightly better. But still not very convincing, IMO. They get far too stuck on a literal interpretation. Of something that self-describes as a heuristic.
Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk
#380Earlier quoted context omitted.
But compared to what - if Anthropic's models aren't perfect but still better than existing (old school) models, it's understandable DoW still wants to use them (since they're potentially the best available, despite imperfections). I think Hegseth is saying to Anthropic: "that's our call, not yours".
But surely if Anthropic thinks there's a risk that their models might make bad decisions, and the resulting civilian or etc deaths are blamed on them, it's their right to refuse to sell it for that purpose? That's why they had those restrictions in the contract to begin with. How can they be forced to provide something?
I agree they can't be forced to provide something. I just see DoW's reasoning, and I can't fault it.
Anthropic are taking a moral position which is admirable, but in this case it could actually make people's lives worse (if we assume more false positives and fewer true positives, which is probably a fair assumption given how much better 'modern' AI is compared to the neural net image recognition of just a few years ago).