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

We Will Not Be Divided

notdivided.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 912 posts

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#451

Post by jbritton »

snickerbockers wrote: post #420
dyslexit wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're making it sound like this is commonly practiced and a standard procedure for the DoD, yet according to Anthropic, >Designating Anthropic as a supply chain risk would be an unprecedented action—one historically reserved for US adversaries, never before publicly applied to an American company. Some very brief googling also confirmed this for me too. >Everyone is fixated on the name of the rule (and to be fair: t…

>an unprecedented action it's also unprecedented for a contractor to suddenly announce their products will, from now on, be able to refuse to function based on the product's evaluation of what it perceives to be an ethical dilemma. Just because silicon valley gets away with bullying the consumer market with mandatory automatic updates and constantly-morphing EULAs doesn't mean they're entitled to take that attitude w…

It’s not clear to me that the AI itself will refuse. You could build a system where AI is asked if an image matches a pattern. The true/false is fed to a different system to fire a missile. Building such a system would violate the contract, but doesn’t prevent such a thing from being built if you don’t mind breaking a contract.

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#452

Post by praxulus »

snickerbockers wrote: post #421
tyre wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Supply chain risk is not meant for this. The government isn't banning Anthropic because using it harms national security. They are banning it in retribution for Anthropic taking a stand. It's the same as Trump claiming emergency powers to apply tariffs, when the "emergency" he claimed was basically "global trade exists." Yes, the government can choose to purchase or not. No, supply chain risk is absolutely not correc…

It doesn't harm national security, but only so long as it's not in the supply-chain. They can't have Lockheed putting Anthropic's products into a fighter jet when Anthropic has already said their products will be able to refuse to carry out certain orders by their own autonomous judgement.

The government can refuse to buy a fighter jet that runs software they don't want.

Is it really reasonable to refuse to buy a fighter jet because somebody at Lockheed who works on a completely unrelated project uses claude to write emails?

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#453

Post by LPisGood »

nikolay wrote: post #416
hakrgrl wrote: post #292

1.5 hours after this was posted, Sam Altman stated openai will work with the DoW. So much for this waste of a domain name. https://x.com/sama/status/2027578652477821175 "Tonight, we reached an agreement with the Department of War to deploy our models in their classified network. "

He's the reason why many people avoid OpenAI as he is among the top 3 most untrustworthy people in tech!

Who are the other two?

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#454

Post by CamperBob2 »

bottlepalm wrote: post #148
reactordev wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I run local models on Mac studios and they are more than capable. Don’t spread fud.

You're spreading fud. There's nothing you can run locally that's on par with the speed/intelligence of a SOTA model.

Incorrect as of a couple of days ago, when Qwen 3.5 came out. It's a GPT 5-class model that you can run at full strength on a small DGX Spark or Mac cluster, and it still works pretty well after quantization.

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#455

Post by yed »

rayiner wrote: post #354
yed wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, for one, they haven’t invoked the Defense Production Act.

The very first point on the website is: “The Department of War is threatening to … Invoke the Defense Production Act.”

A few days ago Hegseth threatened two mutually exclusive things: invoking the Defense Production Act or declaring Anthropic a supply chain risk. Today he went with the latter [https://x.com/SecWar/status/2027507717469049070]. That is the main topic now. What they did is basically the exact opposite of invoking the Defense Production Act.

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#457

Post by puchatek »

qdotme wrote: post #405
m3kw9 wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is not shady, the systems are not ready for that kind of task esp autonomous hunting. Is smart negotiations, plus Sam would have used the Anthropic situation against them saying you can’t designate all AI top American AI companies supply chain risk etc. it’s complete idiocy the would do that anyways

Ready at what level, though. The subtleties are what matters. It’s well established that belligerents can use mines, to separate the tactical decision of deploying for purposes of area denial; from the snap-second lethal decision (if one can stretch that definition) to detonate in response to an triggering event. Dario’s model prohibits using AI to decide between enemy combatant and an innocent civilian (even if the…

It's different because we are talking about a technology that we might lose control over at some point. Those drones in your example might make an entirely different choice than what you anticipated when you let them take off.

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#458

Post by rdtsc »

5o1ecist wrote: post #385

[flagged]

That's always been the loophole. But it involved an extra step so they are just trying to get rid of that one annoyance.

Here is an interesting thing to think about which country spies on Americans the most and how? Are there New Zealand commandos sneaking around the shores tapping cables? Moles working in the AT&T for the Canadian government? What happens if one of those individuals get caught, are they quietly allowed to leave, and if they commit any crimes do the charges get erased magically? Otherwise, if that doesn't happen there is danger they'll grab our spies in their countries in turn. Or they just blatantly pass lists around of who works for whom so they don't interfere with each other as that would preclude getting the data back through the loop to the NSA.

There is of course another loophole and that is private entities collecting data. The Constitution doesn't say anything about that, so the government figures it's fare game if they just pay a company to collect the data and then they query later. They didn't collect it so it's not "spying".

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#459

Post by pokstad »

w4yai wrote: post #417
largbae wrote: post #409

The signatories of this (letter, petition, whatever) are the same folks who profit from creating this Pandora's Box. If you don't want it opened, stop making it?

There are other valid use cases than war for AI.

Then start your own company where you control the direction of the products. All these people make millions and only speak up after they are set for life.

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#460

Post by ipaddr »

conductr wrote: post #355
aguyonhackern wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US would not be net negative growth without government spending. Other components of GDP grow a lot, outside of recessions. Sure if you immediately stopped government spending today we'd have negative growth today but that's not because other things aren't growing, it's because you just removed part of the base that existed last year. That would be true of literally pretty much any economy ever, or anything that'…

Covid shutdown should have killed our economy, nothing short of government spending prevented otherwise. So many people in the US live a paycheck to paycheck lifestyle, that the covid lockdowns without government spending would have likely devolved into zombie apocalypse territory where hungry people were ransacking homes in more affluent neighborhoods (yes, even occupied homes). This is why people also bought lots o…

Do you think the food bank gives you all of your meals everyday? One day not open and people are eating each other.

They wouldn't ransack home in rich neighbourhoods for food for a million reasons (too far, too weak, roads are closed, rich homes have security, rich people have as much food at home or less compared to an average person). They would break into the supermarkets first, then each others homes around them before what was left would organize and go searching.

The checks helped and were the right call but we weren't close to a zombie outbreak.

Post reply on HN