641–650 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't believe they can change the name to Department of War without an actor Congress. It remains the DoD.
Of all the silly things that Trump did, I think this one is the most reasonable. This has always been a department of war. Calling it defense was propaganda.
So they are such a risk to national security that no contractor that works with the federal government may use them, but they're going to keep using them for six more months? So I guess our national security is significantly at risk for the next six months?
It's a waste of your effort to apply rational argument to the actions of a group that are in it for a shakedown.
SCOTUS says POTUS is above the law, so POTUS has collected $4B in bribe / protection money since taking office 13 months ago. Anthropic has lots of money at the moment. Why should they be allow to keep it?
Since they didn't pay off the president (enough?), his goons are going to screw with their revenue and run a PR smear campaign.
Once you realize it only has to do with Trump's personal finances, and nothing to do with national security or the rule of law, then all the administration's actions make perfect rational sense.
Open question: How much should a congress-critter charge Trump for a favorable vote? (The check should come with a presidential pardon in the envelope, of course...)
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…
I don't believe they can change the name to Department of War without an actor Congress. It remains the DoD.
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…
[flagged]
This comment does not hold up to scrutiny. Appealing to the pragmatic and the "game theory" of complying with authoritarian rule that you don't have power over - because the other party that you don't have any power over will benefit from it - is a zero-sum argument.
The "zero-sum" label is equally off-base. Zero-sum describes a situation where one party's gain is necessarily another's loss, and that is precisely the nature of military capability competition. If an adversary fields unrestricted AI systems and you field restricted ones, the gap is real and the consequences are asymmetric. You don't have to like that reality, but calling it a zero-sum argument as though it's a rhetorical trick misidentifies what's actually a structural condition. The term you seem to be reaching for is something closer to "fear-based reasoning" or "false dilemma," but neither of those applies cleanly here either, because the competitive dynamic being described is well-documented and not hypothetical.
If there's a genuine objection to be made, and there may well be, it has to engage with the specifics: whether the restrictions in question actually matter operationally, whether the transition plan is proportionate, whether the policy creates worse risks than it solves. That's where the real debate is.
[edit:typos]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not taking a position here but the person you're replying to stated that Anthropic are working on AGI, not that their current LLM offering will evolve into AGI.
Ok that's different then. LLM, by definition, can't be AGI. But AGI can be AGI with another technology.
False, and you've given no argument to the contrary. There's certainly no definition that precludes it. It isn't, currently; there's no reason it can't be, any more than there's reason that Conway's Game of Life can't be, given sufficiently interesting data to process. Any Turing-complete system could simulate AGI. It might not be the most efficient mechanism for doing so, but that's not the question at hand.
Given that Anthropic is clearly risking their entire business just to stand up for what they believe is right, which appears to be what everyone here agrees with, is everyone who is supporting them here planning to also start using Anthropic and switch away from other vendors until they follow suit? Or are folks planning to just use whatever regardless? Edit: I should perhaps clarify I'm more interested in paid users…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
That's a fair point, but I think Dario's quote in GP corroborates ACX's story quite well: > "Two such use cases have never been included in our contracts with the Department of War..."
> The Leftwing nut jobs at Anthropic have made a DISASTROUS MISTAKE trying to STRONG-ARM the Department of War, and force them to obey their Terms of Service instead of our Constitution.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Europe" is not a single entity with uniform opinions. As an European, I would much rather have hardworking people and """workaholic""" culture than regress to an underdeveloped culture fueled by laziness.
>>underdeveloped culture fueled by laziness Which of the European cultures is "underdeveloped", exactly?
Strange times. I truly feel these are the last days of our Republic. Especially if more aren't willing to take a stand.
How is it that high!?
That means that more than 1-in-3 of your countrymen are ride-or-die, and it's just heartbreaking to see that we're going to have to launch that many people into the sun.