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

711–720 of 1001 posts

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

#711

Post by kalkin »

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.

What do subpoenas have to do with anything?

Where is all the weird misinformation in these comments coming from?

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

#713

Post by tastyface »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #611
labrador wrote: post #544

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They only have to move their headquarters no? Reincorporate in France. Hire Yann LeCun (I like LeCun)

I'm pretty vocal about our collective responsibility to work against the Trump administration, and even I would be hesitant to work as a US employee of a company that fled the country after a dispute with the US military. Seems like an extreme threat to my personal safety for little resistance benefit.

I don't know. Depending on the company, I'd see that as a mark of great pride.

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

#714

Post by dabluecaboose »

hyperhello wrote: post #619
yodsanklai wrote: post #575

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Calling it Department of The Armed Forces or Department of Military would be neutral. Putting War in the name is as propaganda-like as Defense.

After it was changed from DoW the first time (in 1947), it was called the National Military Establishment (NME). They renamed it in 1949, potentially because "NME" said aloud sounds like "Enemy"

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

#716

Post by nelox »

kalkin wrote: post #695
nelox wrote: post #678

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

It's not recent news that Anthropic has (had?) DoD contracts. This is a lot of words to write while seeming ignorant of basic facts about the situation.

The argument isn't that nobody knew Anthropic had DoW contracts. The argument is that there's a difference between "publicly known if you follow defense-tech procurement" and "trending on social media where Anthropic's core audience is now actively discussing it." Both can be true simultaneously.

A fact being technically available and that fact commanding widespread public attention are very different things. Anthropic's communications team understands this distinction even if you don't find it interesting. The blog post wasn't written for people who already track federal AI contracts, it was written for the much larger audience encountering this story for the first time and forming opinions about it in real time.

If the point you're making is just "I already knew this," that's fine, but it doesn't address anything about the incentive structure behind the public response.

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

#717

Post by spuz »

fluidcruft wrote: post #152
Gigachad wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s the crazy thing. This whole dispute was over Anthropic saying no to fully automated kill bots. They only required there be a human in the loop to press the button.

Anthropic didn't even say "no", it was more of a "not yet, let's work on this". I really wonder what Palantir's role in all this is because domestic surveillance sounds exactly like Palantir and whatever happened during the Maduro raid led to Anthropic asking Palantir questions which the news reports is the snowball that escalated to this.

Could you expand on that Anthropic asking Palantir connection to this?

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

#718

Post by skybrian »

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

I think that’s the whole idea. Anthropic didn’t ask for much so that they would look like the reasonable party.

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

#719

Post by xpe »

lavezzi wrote: post #511
lukewrites wrote: post #6

I admire Anthropic for sticking to their principles, even if it affects the bottom line. That’s the kind of company you want to work for.

> 83 people in total killed in US attack to abduct President Nicolas Maduro Blood is on their hands already

So much left unsaid. So much implied. Let’s make it explicit and talk about it. Here are some follow questions that reasonable people will ask:

What was Anthropic’s role in the Maduro operation? (Or we can call it state-sponsored kidnapping.) Who knew what and when? Did A\ find itself in a position where it contradicted its core principles?

More broadly, how does moral culpability work in complex situations like this?

How much moral culpability gets attributed to a helicopter manufacturer used in the Maduro operation? (Assuming one was; you can see my meaning I hope.)

P.S. Traditional programming is easy in comparison to morality.

Post reply on HN