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

We do not think Anthropic should be designated as a supply chain risk

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 491 posts

Re: We do not think Anthropic should be designated as a supply chain risk

#51

Post by scarmig »

softwaredoug wrote: post #44
cube00 wrote: post #8

From that same X thread: Our agreement with the Department of War upholds our redlines [1] OpenAI has the same redlines as Anthopic based on Altman's statements [2]. However somehow Anthropic gets banished for upholding their redlines and OpenAI ends up with the cash? [1]: https://xcancel.com/OpenAI/status/2027846013650932195#m [2]: https://www.npr.org/2026/02/27/nx-s1-5729118/trump-anthropic...

The difference is Anthropic wants contractual limitations on usage, explicitly spelling out cases of Mass Surveillance. OpenAI has more of an understanding that the technology will follow the law. There may not be explicit laws about the cases Anthropic wanted to limit. Or at least it’s open for judicial interpretation. The actual solution is Congress should stop being feckless and imbecilic about technology and crea…

Between Anthropic, the military, and Congress, I have the least faith in Congress to make knowledgeable policy around tech.

Re: We do not think Anthropic should be designated as a supply chain risk

#52

Post by doodlebugging »

yoyohello13 wrote: post #24
thunky wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Optimistic. My money is on everyone forgetting about this by next week.

Yeah just wait until the next model comes out. People will be riding Sam’s dick again in no time.

I'm sure his sister will appreciate others lining up so he leaves her alone forever.

Re: We do not think Anthropic should be designated as a supply chain risk

#53

Post by bertil »

overfeed wrote: post #48
aylmao wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder what the mood is like internally too. I can only imagine there some level of employee discontent.

> I can only imagine there some level of employee discontent. The rank and file mutinied for the return of Altman after his board fired him for deception. They knew what they were getting, though they may find it shameful to admit that their morals have a price.

How many people who reacted that way then are still at OpenAI? It seems that they have lost key people in several waves.

How many people have joined since? I don’t think the people who lobbied for that are all still there, and I’m not sure a majority of people now at OpenAI were there when it happened.

Re: We do not think Anthropic should be designated as a supply chain risk

#55

Post by moogly »

g947o wrote: post #39
moogly wrote: post #4

Looks like losing subscribers actually does work. Definitely gets a damage control response, at least.

Is there any evidence that OpenAI is indeed losing significant number of subscribers, and it's not just some noise on HN?

I'd argue this damage control could be construed as a piece of evidence.

Re: We do not think Anthropic should be designated as a supply chain risk

#56

Post by 3eb7988a1663 »

roughly wrote: post #35

It feels like Sam's playing chess against an opponent who's playing dodge ball. He's leveraged this situation to get OpenAI in with the DoD in a way that's going to be extremely lucrative for the company and hurt his biggest rival in the process, but I think he's still seeing DoD as Just Another Customer, albeit a big government one. This administration just held a gun to the head of Anthropic and (if the "supply cha…

I do not see this as any mastermind play, but fully compromising principles. Which is a play.

"Donations" to a corrupt regime + signing a deal that says DoD can do whatever they want is not out maneuvering so much as rolling in the pig stye.

Re: We do not think Anthropic should be designated as a supply chain risk

#57

Post by amelius »

cube00 wrote: post #8

From that same X thread: Our agreement with the Department of War upholds our redlines [1] OpenAI has the same redlines as Anthopic based on Altman's statements [2]. However somehow Anthropic gets banished for upholding their redlines and OpenAI ends up with the cash? [1]: https://xcancel.com/OpenAI/status/2027846013650932195#m [2]: https://www.npr.org/2026/02/27/nx-s1-5729118/trump-anthropic...

There will be a lawsuit about this.

Re: We do not think Anthropic should be designated as a supply chain risk

#60

Post by stingraycharles »

Nevermark wrote: post #30
cube00 wrote: post #8

From that same X thread: Our agreement with the Department of War upholds our redlines [1] OpenAI has the same redlines as Anthopic based on Altman's statements [2]. However somehow Anthropic gets banished for upholding their redlines and OpenAI ends up with the cash? [1]: https://xcancel.com/OpenAI/status/2027846013650932195#m [2]: https://www.npr.org/2026/02/27/nx-s1-5729118/trump-anthropic...

> more stringent safeguards than previous agreements, including Anthropic's. Except they are not "more stringent". Sam Altman is being brazen to say that. In their own agreement as Altman relays: > The AI System will not be used to independently direct autonomous weapons in any case where law, regulation, or Department policy requires human control > any use of AI in autonomous and semi-autonomous systems must underg…

This implies that OpenAI must build and release and maintain a model without any safeguards, which is probably the big win and maybe something Anthropic never wants to do.
Post reply on HN