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

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

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

651–660 of 1001 posts

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

#651

Post by runlaszlorun »

jrmg wrote: post #608
techblueberry wrote: post #2

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?

They are the same amount of ‘risk’ to national security that the various ‘emergencies’ the executive branch has used as legal excuses to do otherwise illegal things are emergencies. Congress is negligent in not reigning this kind of thing in. We’re rapidly falling down so many slippery semantic slopes.

I'm def adding "slippery semantic slopes" to my vocab.

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

#653

Post by crummy »

rectang wrote: post #135
Someone1234 wrote: post #53

Topics like this are where I struggle with HN philosophy. Normally avoiding politics and ideology where possible, created higher quality and more interesting discussions. But how do you even begin to discuss that Tweet or this topic without talking about ideology and to contextualize this with other seemingly unrelated things currently going on in the US? I genuinely don't think I'm conversationally agile enough to b…

You can't discuss this topic without broaching the idea that the government is acting in bad faith — that they don't actually believe that Anthropic is a supply-chain risk and that this action is meant to punish the company. But this is in the HN guidelines regarding comments: > Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good fait…

On the other hand, pretending the government is acting in good faith is probably acting in bad faith at this point.

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

#654

Post by JoshTriplett »

lemming wrote: post #573
rectang wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't discuss this topic without broaching the idea that the government is acting in bad faith — that they don't actually believe that Anthropic is a supply-chain risk and that this action is meant to punish the company. But this is in the HN guidelines regarding comments: > Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good fait…

My interpretation of that is that I’m required to assume good faith on behalf of other commenters. So, if someone makes the same argument as the government, I’m supposed to assume good faith there, but nothing requires me to assume good faith on behalf of the government. So I can say that this is obviously a shakedown without breaking the rules.

"Assume good faith" does not mean "extend an unlimited amount of good faith to demonstrably bad-faith actors".

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

#655

Post by scottfits »

Besides just being yet another example of the Trump admin abusing power and weaponizing legitimate laws in illegitimate ways to extract concessions, there is another reason this is dumb -- which is that Anthropic just has the best models!

As someone who wants America to win, ripping out Claude and putting in xAI is a terrible idea. Definitely setting us back a few months on capabilities

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

#656

Post by jzig »

doug_durham wrote: post #533
prpl wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

When did legality apply to this administration?

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

#657

Post by nicole_express »

In theory, this is why there should be competition in industry, because it removes the capability of a single large actor to be able to control the government's access to things.

Oddly, though, it seems like that should solve this problem as well. I'm not sure why the Department of Defense insists on Anthropic's models in particular; one would think one of the other players, at the very least least xAI, would be willing to step in and provide the capability Anthropic doesn't want to provide.

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

#658

Post by pixl97 »

aveao wrote: post #431
miltonlost wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a silly shibboleth, but I automatically ignore anyone who calls it the Department of War or Gulf of America. Hasn't steered me wrong yet. They're telling me they're the kind of people who only care about defending fascism.

I call it department of war, because I think it is a great self-own on their part to do such a rename.

There will be no fighting in the war room!

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

#659

Post by Wowfunhappy »

Loughla wrote: post #639
Wowfunhappy wrote: post #545

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Playing devil's advocate: if I did in fact grab one of my kitchen knives to defend myself against a violent intruder into my kitchen, I wouldn't expect to be banned from buying kitchen knives. I'm not sure this is still a useful analogy, though...

If I shoot someone, something that is explicitly warned against in firearm safety materials that come with every purchase of a new firearm, I am no longer allowed to purchase any more firearms.

That's for a different reason though--you broke the law.

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

#660

Post by nilkn »

blhack wrote: post #602
pinkmuffinere wrote: post #416

Wow, and the only restrictions Anthropic asked for are (1) no mass domestic surveillance and (2) require human-in-the-loop for killing [1]. Those seem exceptionally reasonable, and even rather weak, lol :| [1] https://www.anthropic.com/news/statement-department-of-war

Did the DoW ask for these things? This whole thing seems like people talking past each other, and that there’s something being left unsaid. Anthropic doesn’t make a product that would assist with kill drones, and they don’t have the right to deny subpoenas.

Anthropic specifically called out systems "that take humans out of the loop entirely and automate selecting and engaging targets".

I take that to mean they don't want the military using Claude to decide who to kill. As a hyperbolic yet frankly realistic example, they don't want Claude to make a mistake and direct the military to kill innocent children accidentally identified as narco-terrorists.

At least, that's the most charitable interpretation of everything going on. I suspect they are also worried that the sitting administration wants to use AI to help them execute a full autocratic takeover of the United States, so they're attempting to kill one of the world's most innovative companies to set an example and pressure other AI labs into letting their technology be used for such purposes.

Post reply on HN