If the redlines are the same how'd this deal get struck? ChatGPT maker OpenAI has the same redlines as Anthropic when it comes to working with the Pentagon, an OpenAI spokesperson confirmed to CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2026/02/27/tech/openai-has-same-redl...
deals are based on personal relationships, not abstract logic
OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network
471–480 of 702 posts
Re: OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network
#472More details on the difference between the OpenAI and Anthropic contracts from one of the Under Secretaries of State: >The axios article doesn’t have much detail and this is DoW’s decision, not mine. But if the contract defines the guardrails with reference to legal constraints (e.g. mass surveillance in contravention of specific authorities) rather than based on the purely subjective conditions included in Anthropic…
Even this most-charitable-possible (to DoW) explanation does not even come close to justifying the supply chain risk designation. It is absolutely enough (and honestly more than enough) for a contract cancellation and a switch to a competitor. DoW could have done that for any reason at all, or no reason at all. If they had issues with Anthropics terms, they 100% should have done that. Nothing in the quoted text comes…
(Just in case anyone was wondering, I live in Israel)
Re: OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network
#473Re: OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network
#474If the redlines are the same how'd this deal get struck? ChatGPT maker OpenAI has the same redlines as Anthropic when it comes to working with the Pentagon, an OpenAI spokesperson confirmed to CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2026/02/27/tech/openai-has-same-redl...
Look more carefully at what sam altman satd : he did not say he won't remove technical safeguards against surveilance and autonomous killing, instead he said "We also will build technical safeguards to ensure our models behave as they should"
How surprised should I be that a government who’s consistently railed against “woke AI” isn’t caring about that?
Re: OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network
#475Earlier quoted context omitted.
The difference is that Anthropic wanted to reserve the right to judge when the red lines are crossed, while OpenAI will defer to the DoD and its policies for that. In both cases, the two parties can claim to agree on the principles, but when push comes to shove, who decides on whether the principles are violated differs.
Seems Anthropic did not understand the questions they were asked. From the WaPo: >A defense official said the Pentagon’s technology chief whittled the debate down to a life-and-death nuclear scenario at a meeting last month: If an intercontinental ballistic missile was launched at the United States, could the military use Anthropic’s Claude AI system to help shoot it down? >It’s the kind of situation where technologi…
Re: OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network
#476China has evacuated its embassies in Iran. This is really about the imminent strike on Iran which is now super telegraphed. They are gonna use ChatGPT for target selection, and the likely outcome is that it will fuck things up and a bunch of civilians are going to die because of this decision. When this happens, Altman will go from being merely a drifter to having blood on his hands.
Re: OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network
#477Re: OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network
#478Re: OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network
#479Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even this most-charitable-possible (to DoW) explanation does not even come close to justifying the supply chain risk designation. It is absolutely enough (and honestly more than enough) for a contract cancellation and a switch to a competitor. DoW could have done that for any reason at all, or no reason at all. If they had issues with Anthropics terms, they 100% should have done that. Nothing in the quoted text comes…
AFAIK, the U.S. government is fully entitled to serve them under the U.S. Department of War’s terms as per the Defense Production Act. The government has yet to do this, but a company acting in a way that the Department of War perceives as benefiting enemy states could certainly be a justification for declaring a supply chain risk. Anthropic’s decision timing as the U.S. has launched a war in the Middle East to save…
Conversely, I’m glad that we’re looking a little further than that, and are worried about what happens after this missile exchange. After living through an endless “global war on terror” that gave us the biggest mass surveillance enabling act, it’s hard to not dismiss “it’s just until the end of this war, and we promise it’ll end well!”