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

Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 99 posts

Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government

#71

Post by bionhoward »

space_fountain wrote: post #19
ryanackley wrote: post #10

I find all of the virtue signalling from AI companies exhausting.

It's interesting how we dismiss anyone caring about things other than profit as virtue signally. Anthropic was founded by people who seemed to legitimately care about AI safety. It's possible the current conglomeration that is the company doesn't, but I wouldn't be so quick to assume that.

If Anthropic truly cared about AI safety, then they wouldn't put customers in states of uncertainty about monopolistic legal terms buried amidst verbose documents commanding customers to enforce Anthropic legal terms for them AFTER they leak harmful information.

Not only is Anthropic anti-open-source, they're also anti-open-output.

Saying "Hey, try our product! It can do everything!" while ALSO saying, "Sorry, you're not allowed to use our general intelligence product to compete with general intelligence..." just evidences no upper IQ bound on Dunning-Kruger

Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government

#72

Post by jakderrida »

brink wrote: post #17
hmottestad wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GPT-4 is “holy shit, this actually works, could be better but it’s so good I almost can’t believe it” while GPT-3.5 is “when it works it’s pretty great, just a pity it almost never does”. So I would assume that three letter agencies would love to take something like GPT-4 and fine tune it based on all the data they have about existing terrorists.

I'm still dealing with hallucinations nearly every time I use it.

Do you mean 3.5? While I still face issues with GPT 4, I can't even remember the last time it hallucinated. I'm not saying it can't. But, yeah, that's crazy that they're specifically targeting your IP address like that.

Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government

#73

Post by vikramkr »

space_fountain wrote: post #19
ryanackley wrote: post #10

I find all of the virtue signalling from AI companies exhausting.

It's interesting how we dismiss anyone caring about things other than profit as virtue signally. Anthropic was founded by people who seemed to legitimately care about AI safety. It's possible the current conglomeration that is the company doesn't, but I wouldn't be so quick to assume that.

Calling something virtue signaling is not a dismissal of people caring about things other than profit. It's a statement of belief that they don't actually care about things other than profit and are just pretending that they do. There's a pretty clear financial incentive to virtue signal since getting the benefit of the doubt from society lets them make more profit with less scrutiny. There's also no benefit for society to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they're being genuine.

Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government

#74

Post by vikramkr »

sebzim4500 wrote: post #23
ryanackley wrote: post #10

I find all of the virtue signalling from AI companies exhausting.

Are you assuming that anyone claiming to be doing good things must be lying? And then getting angry at them both for not doing the good thing and for the lying? That does sound exhausting.

If they're assuming they're lying, and then the good thing doesn't happen proving they've lied, then that might be exhausting, but they'd also be correct lol. You're allowed to be angry at things that suck about the world.

Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government

#75

Post by kwppen »

p1esk wrote: post #56
thfuran wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't tried more than a handful of queries, but I think I've gotten 100% rate of hallucination or generic useless response to specific question.

Can I try your question? Just curious.

It is very easy to find such questions. A very recent example is a thread about AIs not having a concept of correlation:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40751756

In that thread multiple people posted wrong answers from GPT-4o but assumed that the answers were correct and praised the AI.

This matches my experience that anything that deviates from an encyclopedia lookup or web search is very likely to be wrong.

Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government

#76

Post by jakderrida »

kridsdale3 wrote: post #59
baq wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NSA should be training their own GPT-4 or better model as we speak and should have been doing it for a long while now. Anything else is borderline incompetence.

NSA can't hire the right talent capable of producing that product for the same reason they have trouble finding white-hat security people to hire: You can't work for the government and do drugs in your personal time. Enough of the pie of elite researchers are in to wacky mind-bending that it's a real recruitment problem.

Also, imagine the public shitstorm when people see headlines that NSA has overturned their policy against microdosing. They're not gonna understand what tf is going on and trying to explain it away sure af isn't gonna happen because they'll always believe that all drugs are bad and defending zero tolerance policies are the hallmark of being one of "the good guys".

Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government

#77

Post by kwppen »

notavalleyman wrote: post #67
andrepd wrote: post #14

> Claude offers a wide range of potential applications for government agencies, both in the present and looking toward the future. Government agencies can use Claude to provide improved citizen services, streamline document review and preparation, enhance policymaking with data-driven insights, and create realistic training scenarios. In the near future, AI could assist in disaster response coordination, enhance publ…

Its possible that you may have misunderstood what happened. Firstly, anthropic made an LLM, exposed it to the internet, and provided these terms of acceptable use. https://www.anthropic.com/legal/archive/4903a61b-037c-4293-9... There was no need for cynicism or kool aid at this stage. Later on, presumably now-ish, anthropic changed the usage policy, to add an exception. https://support.anthropic.com/en/articles/95287…

Modern version of "Do no evil"? Come on, no one believes that sort of thing any longer.

Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government

#78

Post by jakderrida »

JBorrow wrote: post #15
alach11 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use LLMs extensively in my field to automate all sorts of tasks. Need to classify a million PDF documents for cheap? Write a prompt and submit a batch job. Need to read 30,000 drilling reports to automatically scan for hazards? Done in 60 minutes. These are tasks that would have taken months of development or millions of dollars in manual effort before. It's not just hype.

Boy, I can’t wait for the foundation of my house to disappear because the LLM mis-classified a drilling report as non-hazardous. What’s the deal here with liability and accountability? That’s a serious problem when considering using these for anything other than toy problems.

>Boy, I can’t wait for the foundation of my house to disappear because the LLM mis-classified a drilling report as non-hazardous

LMAO! It's so hilarious that people like you forget that the alternative is relying on bureaucracies managed by people that get things wrong more often and are both too lazy and too stubborn to process your application to review your drilling report again.

If using both human-level and AI-level analysis is cheaper and much more accurate (but still imperfect), I'm willing to settle for a better system than oppose all change and die holding out for a perfect system.

Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government

#79

Post by p1esk »

kwppen wrote: post #75
p1esk wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can I try your question? Just curious.

It is very easy to find such questions. A very recent example is a thread about AIs not having a concept of correlation: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40751756 In that thread multiple people posted wrong answers from GPT-4o but assumed that the answers were correct and praised the AI. This matches my experience that anything that deviates from an encyclopedia lookup or web search is very likely to be wrong.

What does this have to do with hallucinations?

Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government

#80

Post by notavalleyman »

kwppen wrote: post #77
notavalleyman wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its possible that you may have misunderstood what happened. Firstly, anthropic made an LLM, exposed it to the internet, and provided these terms of acceptable use. https://www.anthropic.com/legal/archive/4903a61b-037c-4293-9... There was no need for cynicism or kool aid at this stage. Later on, presumably now-ish, anthropic changed the usage policy, to add an exception. https://support.anthropic.com/en/articles/95287…

Modern version of "Do no evil"? Come on, no one believes that sort of thing any longer.

They changed their policy, it now says "if the governmental client can convince anthropic that the government client needs to use Claude for purposes of anti-human trafficking. Then, anthropic will allow the government client to use Claude."

It doesn't require you to believe anything. It is not a modern version of any slogan. It's simply that, anthropic will allow government clients to use Claude if anthropic are convinced it's for certain, listed purposes. You are looking at this and approaching it ass-backwards.

It used to be a forbidden use case, or not an expresssly permitted one, for governments to use Claude to fight human trafficking.

Now it expressly permitted. You don't have to drink kool aid to understand this.

The Kansas city FBI field office's human task force, can now get some api keys, as long as they can convince anthropic that it's for a "catch a predator" sting.

Post reply on HN