Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 1001 posts

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#421

Post by tomrod »

alephnerd wrote: post #323
thewebguyd wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not entirely true. The designation only applies to projects that touch the federal government, or software developed specifically for the federal government. Contractors can still use Claude internally in their business, so long as it is not used in government work directly. A complete ban would be adding Anthropic to the NDAA, which requires congress. The DoD designation allows the DoD to make contractors certify th…

> Contractors can still use Claude internally in their business, so long as it is not used in government work directly. I work in the enterprise SaaS and cybersecurity industry. There is no way to guarantee that amongst any FedRAMP vendor (which is almost every cybersecurity and enterprise SaaS or on their roadmap). Almost all FedRAMP products I've built, launched, sold, or funded were the same build as the commerica…

> This means the entire security and enterprise SaaS industry will have to shift away from Anthropic unless the DPA is invoked and management is changed.

This is the core assertion that is not clear nor absolute.

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#422

Post by neoromantique »

AntiDyatlov wrote: post #381
miltonlost wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a silly shibboleth, but I automatically ignore anyone who calls it the Department of War or Gulf of America. Hasn't steered me wrong yet. They're telling me they're the kind of people who only care about defending fascism.

Google Maps calls it Gulf of America, pretty difficult to ignore Google.

https://s3.gtw.lt/lUew91t6v5AO2u6mAPCXAFME.png

Depends where you at

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#423

Post by nickysielicki »

adammarples wrote: post #408
nickysielicki wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

* * *

and?

The cost of a company like Amazon or Google losing their piece of that $1T annual budget is greater than their exposure to the failure of Anthropic.

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#426

Post by nemo44x »

rushcar wrote: post #263

"Effective immediately, no contractor, supplier, or partner that does business with the United States military may conduct any commercial activity with Anthropic." This is authoritarian behavior. You're having trouble negotiating a contract, so instead of just canceling it - you basically ban all of F500 from doing business with that firm.

[flagged]

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#427

Post by mardef »

jeffparsons wrote: post #303
baxtr wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can someone in plain terms explain what this is really about? Anyone can use Claude afaik?

Claude won't answer questions about what cities you should nuke in what order. The Pentagon wants Claude to answer those sorts of questions for them. Edit: oops, I misunderstood. This seems to be more about contractual restrictions.

Claude will answer all of those questions. The restriction Anthropic has is letting Claude pull the trigger and vibe-murder with no humans in the loop.

This restriction is apparently "radically woke"

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#428

Post by stephencoyner »

nickysielicki wrote: post #237

This could kill Anthropic. The designation says any contractor, supplier, or partner doing business with the US military can’t conduct any commercial activity with Anthropic. Well, AWS has JWCC. Microsoft has Azure Government. Google has DoD contracts. If that language is enforced broadly, then Claude gets kicked off Bedrock, Vertex, and potentially Azure… which is where all the enterprise revenue lives. Claude canno…

I’m sure most of their revenue is large enterprise customers who serve government with their products - this looks very bad

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#429

Post by davidw »

ctoth wrote: post #189
cal_dent wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The team that handles their PR has done an amazing job in the last 9 months

Hint: It's much easier to have good PR by being actually good. Though it does make people like this do the whole implication thing.

I saw this the other day:

> Costco is a really popular subject for business-success case studies but I feel like business guys kinda lose interest when the upshot of the study is like "just operate with scrupulous integrity in all facets and levels of your business for four decades" and not some easy-to-fix gimmick

https://bsky.app/profile/mtsw.bsky.social/post/3lnbrfrvmss26

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#430

Post by BLKNSLVR »

827a wrote: post #103

Its one thing to say "we cannot abide by these terms, so let's part ways", and its another entirely to respond this drastically. The Trump administration will look back on this decision as the most consequential in their efforts to win the 2026 midterms and Republican efforts in 2028. This is a $400B+ American company that has significant partial ownership from Amazon, Google, and other private equity sources; they j…

This is a pimple on the arse of said consequence. It's one tiny thing in a chain of many bigger things.

It's magnified because it's right now, but this won't affect midterm results barely a whisker compared to many other daily headlines.

There are no serious enemies to this administration in SV and I can't see this changing that. SV has bent the knee exactly like Anthropic didn't. They're not going to stand up because of this, they've proven they don't have those muscles.

Post reply on HN