Live data from Hacker News

Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

anthropic.com

61–70 of 1001 posts

Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

#61
post #41

Department of War is just such a fucking joke title - when has the US stooped so low, I used to believe in you guys as the force of good on this planet smh

When? Its entire history from the foundation of the Republic to 1947. The name was changed after WWII; now a faction wants to change it back. The difference in name never changed the behavior, in either direction.

Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

#62
I was reading halfway thru and one line struck a nerve with me:

> But today, frontier AI systems are simply not reliable enough to power fully autonomous weapons.

So not today, but the door is open for this after AI systems have gathered enough "training data"?

Then I re-read the previous paragraph and realized it's specifically only criticizing

> AI-driven domestic mass surveillance

And neither denounces partially autonomous mass surveillance nor closes the door on AI-driven foreign mass surveillance

A real shame. I thought "Anthropic" was about being concerned about humans, and not "My people" vs. "Your people." But I suppose I should have expected all of this from a public statement about discussions with the Department of War

Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

#63
post #19

Props to Dario and Anthropic for taking a moral stand. A rarity in tech these days.

This is not how the word "moral" should be used in a sentence that also has the name Dario Amodei in it.

It's a little bit better than so many sniveling, cowardly elites are doing right now.

Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

#64
post #24

As a "foreign national", what's the deal with making the distinction between domestic mass surveillance and foreign mass surveillance? Are there no democracies aside from the US? Don't we know since Snowden that if the US wants to do domestic surveillance they'll just ask GCHQ to share their "foreign" surveillance capabilities?

This is a political statement directed at the US public, Congress, and executive branch in the context of a dispute with the US executive branch that is likely to escalate (if the executive is not otherwise dissuaded) into a legal battle, and it therefore focuses particularly on issues relevant in that context, including Constitutional, limits on the government as a whole, the executive branch, and the Department of Defense (for which Anthropic used the non-legal nickname coined by the executive branch instead of the legal name.) Domestic mass surveillance involves Constitutional limits on government power and statutory limits on executive power and DoD roles that foreign surveillance does not. That's why it is the focus.

Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

#65
post #24

As a "foreign national", what's the deal with making the distinction between domestic mass surveillance and foreign mass surveillance? Are there no democracies aside from the US? Don't we know since Snowden that if the US wants to do domestic surveillance they'll just ask GCHQ to share their "foreign" surveillance capabilities?

I think it's slightly less ridiculous than it sounds, because governments have much more power over their own citizens. As an American I would dramatically prefer the Chinese government to spy on me than the American government, because the Chinese government probably isn't going to do anything about whatever they find out.

(That logic breaks down somewhat in the case of explicitly negotiated surveillance sharing agreements.)

Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

#67
post #62

I was reading halfway thru and one line struck a nerve with me: > But today, frontier AI systems are simply not reliable enough to power fully autonomous weapons. So not today, but the door is open for this after AI systems have gathered enough "training data"? Then I re-read the previous paragraph and realized it's specifically only criticizing > AI-driven domestic mass surveillance And neither denounces partially a…

I think it's phrased just fine. It's not up to Dario to try to make absolute statements about the future.

Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

#68

This is such a depressing read. What is becoming of the USA? Let's hope sanity prevails and the next election cycle can bring in some competent non-grievance based leadership.

[flagged]

Yeah. They really are trying hard to lose.

Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

#69
post #24

As a "foreign national", what's the deal with making the distinction between domestic mass surveillance and foreign mass surveillance? Are there no democracies aside from the US? Don't we know since Snowden that if the US wants to do domestic surveillance they'll just ask GCHQ to share their "foreign" surveillance capabilities?

One of them is illegal for DoD to do and the other is not.

Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

#70

This is such a depressing read. What is becoming of the USA? Let's hope sanity prevails and the next election cycle can bring in some competent non-grievance based leadership.

This isn't a one-election thing. It's going to be a generational effort to fix what these people are breaking more of every day. I hope I live to see it come to some kind of fruition - I recently turned 50.
Post reply on HN