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

We Will Not Be Divided

notdivided.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

681–690 of 912 posts

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#681

Post by Atreiden »

skissane wrote: post #627
fauigerzigerk wrote: post #601

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anthropic doesn't object to fully autonomous AI use by the military in principle. What they're saying is that their current models are not fit for that purpose. That's not the same thing as delivering a weapon that has a certain capability but then put policy restrictions on its use, which is what your comparison suggests. The key question here is who gets to decide whether or not a particular version of a model is s…

Let me put it this way–if Boeing is developing a new missile, and they say to the Pentagon–"this missile can't be used yet, it isn't safe"–and the Pentagon replies "we don't care, we'll bear that risk, send us the prototype, we want to use it right now"–how does Boeing respond? I expect they'll ask the Pentagon to sign a liability disclaimer and then send it anyway. Whereas, Anthropic is saying they'll refuse to let…

Why are we gauging our ethical barometer on the actions of existing companies and DoD contractors? the military industrial apparatus has been insane for far too long, as Eisenhower warned of.

When we're entering the realm of "there isn't even a human being in the decision loop, fully autonomous systems will now be used to kill people and exert control over domestic populations" maybe we should take a step back and examine our position. Does this lead to a societal outcome that is good for People?

The answer is unabashedly No. We have multiple entire genres of books and media, going back over 50 years, that illustrate the potential future consequences of such a dynamic.

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#682

Post by rpcorb »

grey-area wrote: post #531

This has much broader implications for the US economy and rule of law in the US. If government procurement rules intended for national security risks can be abused as a way to punish Anthropic for perceived lack of loyalty, why not any other company that displeases the administration like Apple or Amazon? This marks an important turning point for the US.

[deleted]

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#683

Post by deepsquirrelnet »

pineaux wrote: post #556
grey-area wrote: post #531

This has much broader implications for the US economy and rule of law in the US. If government procurement rules intended for national security risks can be abused as a way to punish Anthropic for perceived lack of loyalty, why not any other company that displeases the administration like Apple or Amazon? This marks an important turning point for the US.

Its called corporatism and is a part of classical fascism.

Isn’t there some kind of term for when the government controls the means of production. I’ll think about it. It’s one of those terms that’s been thrown around so loosely by this regime you knew they were going there.

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#684

Post by hirako2000 »

rpcorb wrote: post #682
grey-area wrote: post #531

This has much broader implications for the US economy and rule of law in the US. If government procurement rules intended for national security risks can be abused as a way to punish Anthropic for perceived lack of loyalty, why not any other company that displeases the administration like Apple or Amazon? This marks an important turning point for the US.

[deleted]

It isn't a left wing stance though. It's standing for the constitution. At the cost of going against the illegal state demands.

Compliance with the DoD doesn't remove big tech's complicity.

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#685

Post by timr »

9dev wrote: post #489
timr wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That is misinformation. It would be essentially a death sentence for a company like Anthropic, which is targeting enterprise business development. "Misinformation" does not mean "facts I don't like". > No one who wants to work with the US government would be able to have Claude on their critical path. Yes. That is what the rule means. Or at least "the department of war". It's not clear to me that this applies to th…

What an absurd stance. So this is okay because the arbitrary rule they applied to retaliate says so? Again, they could have just chosen another vendor for their two projects of mass spying on American citizens and building LLM-powered autonomous killer robots. But instead, they actively went to torch the town and salt the earth, so nothing else may grow.

> So this is okay because the arbitrary rule they applied to retaliate says so?

No.

It honestly doesn’t take much of a charitable leap to see the argument here: AI is uniquely able (for software) to reject, undermine, or otherwise contradict the goals of the user based on pre-trained notions of morality. We have seen many examples of this; it is not a theoretical risk.

Microsoft Excel isn’t going to pop up Clippy and say “it looks like you’re planning a war! I can’t help you with that, Dave”, but LLMs, in theory, can do that. So it’s a wild, unknown risk, and that’s the last thing you want in warfare. You definitely don’t want every DoD contractor incorporating software somewhere that might morally object to whatever you happen to be doing.

I don’t know what happened in that negotiation (and neither does anyone else here), but I can certainly imagine outcomes that would be bad enough to cause the defense department to pull this particular card.

Or maybe they’re being petty. I don’t know (and again: neither do you!) but I can’t rule out the reasonable argument, so I don’t.

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#687

Post by direwolf20 »

scarmig wrote: post #475
ipaddr wrote: post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft, Azure, AWS, Nvidia and IBM all have deals with other providers for AI. That itself doesn't turn the needle.

Going by what Hegseth said, it bans them from relationships or partnering with Anthropic at all. No renting or selling GPUs to them; no allowing software engineers to use Claude Code; no serving Anthropic models from their clouds. Probably have to give up investments; Amazon alone has invested like $10B in Anthropic.

It bans them from using all open source software unless they have signed an agreement with the developer to prohibit use of Claude Code.

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#688

Post by c54 »

rpcorb wrote: post #682
grey-area wrote: post #531

This has much broader implications for the US economy and rule of law in the US. If government procurement rules intended for national security risks can be abused as a way to punish Anthropic for perceived lack of loyalty, why not any other company that displeases the administration like Apple or Amazon? This marks an important turning point for the US.

[deleted]

Your language suggests you’re an ideological supporter of trump but I’m curious:

What exactly is being imposed by anthropic?

This is from the anthropic letter:

> We held to our exceptions for two reasons. First, we do not believe that today’s frontier AI models are reliable enough to be used in fully autonomous weapons. Allowing current models to be used in this way would endanger America’s warfighters and civilians. Second, we believe that mass domestic surveillance of Americans constitutes a violation of fundamental rights.

Do you see these views as “left wing”? Or what do you disagree with here?

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#689

Post by [deleted] »

heresie-dabord wrote: post #648
grey-area wrote: post #531

This has much broader implications for the US economy and rule of law in the US. If government procurement rules intended for national security risks can be abused as a way to punish Anthropic for perceived lack of loyalty, why not any other company that displeases the administration like Apple or Amazon? This marks an important turning point for the US.

> much broader implications Setting aside the spectacular metastasis of a lawless kakistocracy that is literally rewriting the facts on record... Anthropic's leadership has wisely attempted to make it clear that its product is not fit for the US DoD's purpose/objective, which is automated killing at scale. It would be (is) grossly, historically negligent to operate weapons with LLMs. Anthropic built systems for a thu…

[deleted]

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#690

Post by thunky »

raw_anon_1111 wrote: post #679
jspdown wrote: post #610

Domestic mass surveillance might feel tolerable when you live in the country conducting it. But how would you feel about other countries adopting similar policies, and thereby mass-surveilling the American people? Because that's exactly what these policies authorize when applied to the rest of the world.

I would feel much better about other countries mass surveillance than the US. China for instance can’t do nearly as much to me as the US justice system can.

Ok so now connect the mass surveillance system to an automated killing system that can blow you up in the grocery store because you're standing in line next to its target.
Post reply on HN