Naturally OpenAI also releases their new model on the same day.
Makes sense, obviously, but yeesh.
Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk
51–60 of 319 posts
Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
Implementation details TBH. They want “their boys” to do as said. No respect to agreement or legality as we can see in other dealings. They hold all they cards.
It's not an "implementation detail." Either obeying contract law subjects you to being designated a supply-chain risk, or it does not, and that decision has ramifications outside this "implementation."
Irrelevant. The president holds all the cards, he is above the law and you are a supply chain risk if you ask anything else other than “how high” when you are told to jump. Laws or contracts are things in the past. The most a contract can do is define your limits and obligations, not your rights or privileges,
Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk
#53Exported all my chats and deleted my ChatGPT account yesterday. The current administration not liking you is the strongest signal I could possibly have to go all in on a particular company.
Are you able to view your chats through the .html file in the export? Mine are all garbled, like the JSON's not being parsed properly or something.
Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk
#54I said it before and I say it again: If openly bribing a crony gov to cancel your competitor is now the de-facto standard of making business in the US, I don't see how any rational investor could still see US companies as a secure investment. When the rule of law degrades into pay-to-play politics, the inevitable result is a mass exodus of both capital and top-tier talent. And to add to this quoting another commentat…
Been going on for a long time https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture
There is a substantial difference between the standard lobbying and greasing the legislative wheels, and what's going on with this current administration.
Even if companies were pretending to play by the rules before, at least they had some need to put in the effort to pretend. When a society can see belligerent ostentatious corruption going on as the norm, nothing good can follow.
Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk
#55The consequence is that any company that does business with the U.S. military, and potentially any company that does business with the government in general, must stop using Anthropic's products for that work. Anthropic has vowed to fight this designation in court. Without weighing in on the constitutionality or legality of the move, I think it's obvious that this kind of retaliation power is unmatched by any private…
I’d like a lawyer to give some input. If you have a company that deals with the military does this chain down to not being allowed to use Claude or not?
IANAL and this is my understanding of the situation (I can be completely wrong) but yes, any company that deals with military cant use Claude (anthropic)
In fact adding onto it, IIRC this is the reason why google and amazon have to divest essentially from Anthropic if they want Govt. contracts
Hope this helps though a lawyer's input will definitely be more credible. So its good for them to respond as well.
Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk
#56Exported all my chats and deleted my ChatGPT account yesterday. The current administration not liking you is the strongest signal I could possibly have to go all in on a particular company.
[flagged]
Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk
#57The consequence is that any company that does business with the U.S. military, and potentially any company that does business with the government in general, must stop using Anthropic's products for that work. Anthropic has vowed to fight this designation in court. Without weighing in on the constitutionality or legality of the move, I think it's obvious that this kind of retaliation power is unmatched by any private…
Every action has an opposite reaction. The DoD has made itself riskier to do business with, and future contacts will have to price that risk in.
The DoD has been rather consistent that they will decide what to do with a product sold to them, not some random vendor. There is nothing extra to "price in".
Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk
#58I said it before and I say it again: If openly bribing a crony gov to cancel your competitor is now the de-facto standard of making business in the US, I don't see how any rational investor could still see US companies as a secure investment. When the rule of law degrades into pay-to-play politics, the inevitable result is a mass exodus of both capital and top-tier talent. And to add to this quoting another commentat…
> I said it before and I say it again: If openly bribing a crony gov to cancel your competitor is now the de-facto standard of making business in the US, I don't see how any rational investor could still see US companies as a secure investment. Arguably large parts of the market in the US have been irrational and largely vibes based for a long time at this point. This action (like many others coming out of the Trump…
>I don't see how any rational investor could still see US companies as a secure investment.
You don't see how?
Well, just watch and wait, and you will see that this will have essentially zero effect on US investment.
It's petty and sad, but nothing ever happens.
Who else is even in the conversation? China? They would never do something like this!
Re: Pentagon formally labels Anthropic supply-chain risk
#59Huh, and I thought conservatives were all about government staying our of the way of the private sector. Go figure...
They're not conservatives.