Live data from Hacker News

I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

twitter.com

531–540 of 1001 posts

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#531

McCarthyism began in 1947, with Truman demanding goverment employees be "screened for loyalty". They wanted to remove anyone who was a member of an "organization" they didn't like. It began with hearings, and then blacklists, and then arrests and prison sentences. It lasted until 1959. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism ) This is the new McCarthyism. Do what the administration says, or you will be blackliste…

[flagged]

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#532

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not entirely true. The designation only applies to projects that touch the federal government, or software developed specifically for the federal government. Contractors can still use Claude internally in their business, so long as it is not used in government work directly. A complete ban would be adding Anthropic to the NDAA, which requires congress. The DoD designation allows the DoD to make contractors certify th…

The language in the tweet was " Effective immediately, no contractor, supplier, or partner that does business with the United States military may conduct any commercial activity with Anthropic." Is that just his fantasy or?

Well, IANAL but tweets aren't legislation. What that tweet implies is something that would have to be amended into the NDAA, which requires congress. Hegseth can't just go on a drunk rant and have everything out of his mouth become law.

The supply chain risk directive would come from existing procurement law, which only allows the DoD to require contractors to certify that Anthropic is not used in the fulfillment of any government work.

Which is also separate from Trumps' EO, which being an EO only applies to the federal government directly.

So yeah, banning any contractor, supplier, or partner from any commercial activity with Anthropic is just fantasy without going through congress first.

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#533
post #314
post #24

> Effective immediately, no contractor, supplier, or partner that does business with the United States military may conduct any commercial activity with Anthropic. I’m sure the lawyers just got paged, but does this mean the hyperscalers (AWS, GCP) can’t resell Claude anymore to US companies that aren’t doing business with the DoD? That’s rough.

Probably yes. Additionally the (probably more for AWS) won't be allowed to use it internally either. This will probably apply to all the top SaaS/software companies unilaterally. Additionally, every major university will undoubtedly have to terminate the use of Claude. First on the list will be universities that run labs under DOD contracts (e.g. MIT, Princeton, JHU), DOE contracts (Stanford, University of California…

There is no evidence that what you say is true. A tweet is not a legally binding statement.

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#534
post #357

The disconnect here for me is, I assume the DoW and Anthropic signed a contract at some point and that contract most likely stipulated that these are the things they can do and these are the things they can't do. I would assume the original terms the DoW is now railing against were in those original contracts that they signed. In that case it looks like the DoW is acting in bad faith here, they signed the original co…

The writeup here[1] was pretty clear to me. > *Isn’t it unreasonable for Anthropic to suddenly set terms in their contract?* The terms were in the original contract, which the Pentagon agreed to. It’s the Pentagon who’s trying to break the original contract and unilaterally change the terms, not Anthropic. > *Doesn’t the Pentagon have a right to sign or not sign any contract they choose?* Yes. Anthropic is the one sa…

I just wish there was a stronger source on this. I am inclined to agree you and the source you cited, but unfortunately

> [1] This story requires some reading between the lines - the exact text of the contract isn’t available - but something like it is suggested by the way both sides have been presenting the negotiations.

I deal with far too many people who won't believe me without 10 bullet-proof sources but get very angry with me if I won't take their word without a source :(

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#535

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were two red lines, as I understand it -- first, automated kill bots, and second, mass surveillance.

I guess the problem for Trump is if he orders the army to gun down protesters, there’s a good chance they will refuse to do it. While a bot can just be prompted to go ahead.

[flagged]

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#536
post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a waste of your effort to apply rational argument to the actions of a group that are in it for a shakedown.

[flagged]

This makes an interesting assumption: that being told by any member of government that you're legally required to do something, means you're required to do that thing, and that they're definitely not making those things up as they go.

But that's not the case, is it? The government can say that it's legally required to give Donald Trump a gold bar every Sunday. That wouldn't even be too far off from the outlandish claims we've seen over the past year. The Trump administration is, as Chapelle would put it, a habitual line stepper.

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#538
post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a waste of your effort to apply rational argument to the actions of a group that are in it for a shakedown.

[flagged]

> If Anthropic doesn’t want the responsibilities of being a US company

When did this suddenly become "businesses will do whatever the government says regardless of earlier contracts signed"?

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#539

Help me understand the line Anthropic is drawing in the sand? Don't get me wrong i'm glad they are unwilling to do certain things... but to me it also seems a little ironic that Anthropic literally is partnered with Palantir which already mass surveills the US. Claude was used in the operation in Venezuala. Their line not to cross seems absurdly thin? Or there is something mega scary thats already much worse they wer…

The whole reason this is happening is because Anthropic looked into how Claude was used in the Maduro op and found it to violate the negotiated terms of service.

Their hard lines are:

- no usage of AI to commit murder WITHOUT a human in the loop

- no usage of AI for domestic mass surveillance

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#540
post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The writeup here[1] was pretty clear to me. > *Isn’t it unreasonable for Anthropic to suddenly set terms in their contract?* The terms were in the original contract, which the Pentagon agreed to. It’s the Pentagon who’s trying to break the original contract and unilaterally change the terms, not Anthropic. > *Doesn’t the Pentagon have a right to sign or not sign any contract they choose?* Yes. Anthropic is the one sa…

I just wish there was a stronger source on this. I am inclined to agree you and the source you cited, but unfortunately > [1] This story requires some reading between the lines - the exact text of the contract isn’t available - but something like it is suggested by the way both sides have been presenting the negotiations. I deal with far too many people who won't believe me without 10 bullet-proof sources but get ver…

Those people are dealing with you in bad faith, and you need to cut them off before they try to overthrow your government again.
Post reply on HN