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

Post by spongebobstoes » Sat, Feb 28, 2026, 11:45 PM UTC

mpalmer wrote: post #587

spongebobstoes wrote: post #579

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you're right, supply chain risk is not a negotiating tool. it's spite after talks have ended. it indicates a ruined relationship the oai deal is similar, but it includes technical safeguards. I think anthropic would have wanted the oai deal the deal was not only successful because the govt is rebounding. the miltary prefers boundaries to be technical, not contractual they can try using it, and trust that it will only…

> supply chain risk is not a negotiating tool. it's spite after talks have ended. No. It's unlawful abuse of power. > the miltary prefers boundaries to be technical, not contractual That's nice for the military. Meanwhile, Anthropic has the right to refuse the use of its IP without being subject to punishment by the government. You seem to me to be irretrievably "deal-brained", and not at all concerned about the obvi…

Post by fc417fc802 » Sun, Mar 01, 2026, 1:13 AM UTC

throwaway2037 wrote: post #656

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.

> 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. I will respond with a personal, related story. I was living in Hongkong when "democracy fell" in the late 2010s / early 2020s. It was depressing, and I wanted to leave. (I did later.) I was trying to explain to my parents (and relatives) why most highly skilled foreign workers just d…

Post by hwc » Sun, Mar 01, 2026, 1:36 AM UTC

Post by darkerside » Sun, Mar 01, 2026, 2:19 AM UTC

remarkEon wrote: post #185

layer8 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is that Anthropic wanted to reserve the right to judge when the red lines are crossed, while OpenAI will defer to the DoD and its policies for that. In both cases, the two parties can claim to agree on the principles, but when push comes to shove, who decides on whether the principles are violated differs.

Seems Anthropic did not understand the questions they were asked. From the WaPo: >A defense official said the Pentagon’s technology chief whittled the debate down to a life-and-death nuclear scenario at a meeting last month: If an intercontinental ballistic missile was launched at the United States, could the military use Anthropic’s Claude AI system to help shoot it down? >It’s the kind of situation where technologi…

Post by xphos » Sun, Mar 01, 2026, 3:19 AM UTC

raw_anon_1111 wrote: post #603

xphos wrote: post #501

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean this is not actually true and the statement justifies and vindicates those that do sell out by saying of course anyone would. There are countless marytr for religion, politics, and other things. A better way is to say you can always find a cheap sellout at least than the morally dammed cannot claim equality of belief

You mean like all of the religious leaders who are actively supporting a defending a three time married adulterer? You’ll have to excuse my skepticism of the morality of “the moral majority”.