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

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

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

611–620 of 702 posts

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

#611

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

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

#612

Post by [deleted] »

tedsanders wrote: post #248
baconner wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Respectfully, it's very hard to see how anyone could look at what just happened and come to the conclusion that one company ends up classed a "supply chain risk" while another agrees the the same terms that led to that. Either the terms are looser, they're not going to be enforced, or there's another reason for the loud attempt to blacklist Anthropic. It's very difficult to see how you could take this at face value i…

I agree it makes little sense, and I think if all players were rational it never would have played out this way. My understanding is that there are other reasons (i.e., beyond differing red lines) that made the OpenAI deal more palatable, but unfortunately the information shared with me has not been made public so I won't comment on specifics. I know that's unsatisfying, but I hope it serves as some very mild evidenc…

[deleted]

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

#613

Post by plandis »

tedsanders wrote: post #248
baconner wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Respectfully, it's very hard to see how anyone could look at what just happened and come to the conclusion that one company ends up classed a "supply chain risk" while another agrees the the same terms that led to that. Either the terms are looser, they're not going to be enforced, or there's another reason for the loud attempt to blacklist Anthropic. It's very difficult to see how you could take this at face value i…

I agree it makes little sense, and I think if all players were rational it never would have played out this way. My understanding is that there are other reasons (i.e., beyond differing red lines) that made the OpenAI deal more palatable, but unfortunately the information shared with me has not been made public so I won't comment on specifics. I know that's unsatisfying, but I hope it serves as some very mild evidenc…

That’s not evidence. You’re effectively saying “trust me bro” without a shred of proof to backup your claims.

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

#614

Post by joemi »

manmal wrote: post #339
blueblisters wrote: post #154

My knee-jerk reaction to this was looks like an opportunistic maneuver that Sam is known for and I'm considering canceling my subscriptions and business with OpenAI But what's the most charitable / objective interpretation of this? For example - https://x.com/UnderSecretaryF/status/2027594072811098230 Does it suggest that determination of "lawful use" and Dario's concerns falls upon the government, not the AI provide…

Unless you're using an enterprise plan or pay per token, you're not hurting their business at all by cancelling. The consumer plans are heavily subsidised.

This is ultimately about drawing moral lines, isn't it? In that case it wouldn't matter if it hurts their business or not.

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

#615

Post by segmondy »

NewsaHackO wrote: post #584
segmondy wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't be this naive?

His point reeks of cope. But making a large amount of money would make anyone dumb, deaf, and blind. Also, I give a little leeway to people who are employees without executive decision-making power, as they do stand to have a lot to lose in situations like this.

It's probably how they are coping with the cognitive dissonance. I certainly feel for them, I don't know that I could easily walk away from a big pay package either without backup options when I have family to support and I'm not near retirement.

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

#616

Post by nilamo »

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.

And all the survivors die from radiation? This must be a joke

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

#617

Post by joemi »

ukblewis wrote: post #472
MostlyStable wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even this most-charitable-possible (to DoW) explanation does not even come close to justifying the supply chain risk designation. It is absolutely enough (and honestly more than enough) for a contract cancellation and a switch to a competitor. DoW could have done that for any reason at all, or no reason at all. If they had issues with Anthropics terms, they 100% should have done that. Nothing in the quoted text comes…

AFAIK, the U.S. government is fully entitled to serve them under the U.S. Department of War’s terms as per the Defense Production Act. The government has yet to do this, but a company acting in a way that the Department of War perceives as benefiting enemy states could certainly be a justification for declaring a supply chain risk. Anthropic’s decision timing as the U.S. has launched a war in the Middle East to save…

> Anthropic’s decision timing as the U.S. has launched a war in the Middle East [...]

According to Anthropic, their terms have been in their contract from the beginning. The only decision they made recently is not to be strong-armed into renegotiating their contract to allow things they don't want to allow. I don't see how that's a bad thing.

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

#618

Post by tedd4u »

tfehring wrote: post #284
tedsanders wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

(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…

    `yes | killbot -model openai`
Post reply on HN