OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network • Hacker News Board

Re: OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network

#511

Post by UncleMeat » Sat, Feb 28, 2026, 2:01 PM UTC

tedsanders wrote: post #220

Imnimo wrote: post #16

I don't see how OpenAI employees who have signed the We Will Not Be Divided letter can continue their employment there in light of this. Surely if OpenAI had insisted upon the same things that Anthropic had, the government would not have signed this agreement. The only plausible explanation is that there is an understanding that OpenAI will not, in practice, enforce the red lines.

I'm an OpenAI employee and I'll go out on a limb with a public comment. I agree AI shouldn't be used for mass surveillance or autonomous weapons. I also think Anthropic has been treated terribly and has acted admirably. My understanding is that the OpenAI deal disallows domestic mass surveillance and autonomous weapons, and that OpenAI is asking for the same terms for other AI companies (so that we can continue compe…

Bad timing to be defending OpenAI's collaboration with the military as it launches an illegal bombing campaign.

Re: OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network

#512

Post by tclancy » Sat, Feb 28, 2026, 2:03 PM UTC

the_real_cher wrote: post #455

cheonn638 wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> theyre food delivery robots, thats not a gun that a drink dispenser!" You underestimate how many top AI scientists are perfectly okay with building autonomous weapons systems and are not ashamed of it. Me, and 99% of HN readers, will gladly pull the trigger to release a missile from a drone if we are paid even just US$1,000,000/year. Now note that many L7+ at OpenAI are making $10 million+ per year.

The world needs a nuclear war to just eliminate 99% of human life and just start over.

Same answer the last ten thousand edge lords who said this got: you first.

Re: OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network

#513

Post by voganmother42 » Sat, Feb 28, 2026, 2:03 PM UTC

ukblewis wrote: post #463

gabeh wrote: post #239

It's only $200 from me for the remainder of the year but you're not getting it anymore OpenAI. Voting with my wallet tonight. Really sad, I've followed OpenAI for years, way before ChatGPT. It's just too hard to true up my values with how they've behaved recently. This sucks. Goodnight everyone.

[flagged]

Won’t anyone think of the poor billionaires?

Re: OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network

#514

Post by estearum » Sat, Feb 28, 2026, 2:05 PM UTC

spondyl wrote: post #329

tfehring wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Disclosure, I'm a former OpenAI employee and current shareholder.) I have two qualms with this deal. First, Sam's tweet [0] reads as if this deal does not disallow autonomous weapons, but rather requires "human responsibility" for them. I don't think this is much of an assurance at all - obviously at some level a human must be responsible, but this is vague enough that I worry the responsible human could be very far…

Jeremy Lewin's tweet referenced that "all lawful use" is the particular term that seems to be a particular sticking point. While I don't live in the US, I could imagine the US government arguing that third party doctrine[0] means that aggregation and bulk-analysis of say; phone record metadata is "lawful use" in that it isn't /technically/ unlawful, although it would be unethical. Another avenue might also be purchas…

To be clear, the sticking point is actually that the DoD signed a deal with Anthropic a few months ago that had an Acceptable Use Policy which, like all policies, is narrower than the absolute outer bounds of statutory limitations.

DoD is now trying to strongarm Anthropic into changing the deal that they already signed!

Re: OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network

#515

Post by galangalalgol » Sat, Feb 28, 2026, 2:07 PM UTC

thunky wrote: post #458

pear01 wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you believe that? If that were the case what was the issue with Anthropic even about? You, and your colleagues, should resign.

> You, and your colleagues, should resign. It would be better if everyone stopped doing business with OpenAI so these employees lose their stock value. But of course neither of these things will happen.

Who still does business with open ai and why? They are usually 5th or sixth in the benchmarks bracketed below and above by models that cost less. This has been the case for quite some time. Glm is out for us government purposes I'd imagine, but if google agrees to the same terms I don't see why the us government would use open ai anyway. If google disagrees it would be rather confusing given the other invasions of privacy they have facilitated, but if they do then using open ai would make sense as all that would be left is grok...

Re: OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network

#516

Post by mpalmer » Sat, Feb 28, 2026, 2:11 PM UTC

spongebobstoes wrote: post #255

Analemma_ wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As people have repeatedly mentioned, if the War Department was unhappy with Anthropic's terms, they could have refused to sign the contract. But they didn't: they were fine with it for over a year. And if they changed their mind, they could've ended the contract and both sides could've walked away. Anthropic said that would've been fine. But that's not what happened either: they threatened Anthropic with both SCR des…

it seems like oai deal does include the same red lines, plus some more, and the ability for oai to deploy safety systems to limit the use cases of the model via technical means this seems strictly better than what anthropic had. anthropic has ruined their relationship with the US govt, giving oai a good negotiating hand the oai folks are good at making deals, just look at all the complex funding arrangements they hav…

"OAI wins by playing the government's game" is such a catastrophically bad take.

> anthropic has ruined their relationship with the US govt, giving oai a good negotiating hand

You want to try defending this ridiculous statement a bit more thoroughly?

For a start, the designation by the government of a company as a supply chain risk is not a negotiating tool. It may well be found to be arbitrary and capricious once the courts look at it. Business have rights too.

For another, why do you think OAI was able to make what looks like the same deal? Anthropic was willing to say yes to anything lawful up to their red lines, and it was still a no. Why turn around and give OAI exactly the same thing, unless it's not really what it looks like?

And Altman is always looking for the next buck.

All these supposedly impressive complex funding arrangements have OAI on the hook to firms like Oracle in the hundreds of billions of dollars. No indication at all how this unprofitable business will become a trillion dollar juggernaut.

Re: OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network

#517

Post by voganmother42 » Sat, Feb 28, 2026, 2:11 PM UTC

straydusk wrote: post #49

I know the reaction to this, if you're a rational observer, is "OpenAI have cut corners or made concessions that Anthropic did not, that's the only thing that makes sense." However, if you live in the US and pay a passing attention to our idiotic politics, you know this is right out of the Trump playbook. It goes like this: * Make a negotiation personal * Emotionally lash out and kill the negotiation * Complete a wor…

If you support openai, you support this admin, simple as

Re: OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network

#518

Post by chazftw » Sat, Feb 28, 2026, 2:12 PM UTC

Imnimo wrote: post #16

I don't see how OpenAI employees who have signed the We Will Not Be Divided letter can continue their employment there in light of this. Surely if OpenAI had insisted upon the same things that Anthropic had, the government would not have signed this agreement. The only plausible explanation is that there is an understanding that OpenAI will not, in practice, enforce the red lines.

It was just a ruse to figure out who to fire. Either resign on your own terms or get fired. Companies and government only have one loyalty, to themselves,

Re: OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network

#519

Post by voganmother42 » Sat, Feb 28, 2026, 2:13 PM UTC

LarsDu88 wrote: post #200

China 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.

OpenAI in action: https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2026/2/28/israel-strikes-...

Re: OpenAI agrees with Dept. of War to deploy models in their classified network

#520

Post by mpalmer » Sat, Feb 28, 2026, 2:14 PM UTC

ozgung wrote: post #353

Do I understand this correctly: An algorithm, an ML model trained to predict next tokens to write meaningful text, is going to KILL actual humans by itself. So killing people is legal, Killing people by a random process is legal, A randomized algorithm deciding on who to kill is legal, And some of you think you are legally protected because they used the word “domestic”?

I don't think you do?

Who said that any of it is legal? Keeping in mind that when the government does something, it usually takes more than 24h for there to be an official determination on whether they broke the law.