751–760 of 912 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
XAI has already announced they are 100% in https://x.ai/news/us-gov-dept-of-war
This kind of screams desperation, but I guess that's what happens when you're niche AI.
At some point its hard not to think they just cant avoid the money. At least for the SWEs these are folks who could work at much less "evil" businesses and still easily clear $150k or $200k but they just cant help themselves. This is a company that steals its training data and whose primary product is at best an anti working-class cudgel that management can use to intimidate workers and threaten them with replacement and at worse is a mass-surveillance/killing tool.
> We hope our leaders will put aside their differences and stand together to continue to refuse the Department of War's current demands for permission to use our models for domestic mass surveillance and autonomously killing people without human oversight. Hope is neat, but are the signatories willing to quit their jobs over this? Kind of a hollow threat if not.
Maybe their union will call a strike
I simply do not understand why Americans tech companies and their employees will hew and cry about supporting the military. For those of you who support their position, have you ever stopped to consider that your safe, comfortable lives of free speech and protests and TikTok and food and gas and Amazon Next-Day deliveries is enabled by a massive nuclear deterrent operated by the very military you oppose? It is just s…
> “I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it.” — Colonel Jessup
On a CBS interview this morning, Dario defended his position with the claim that he must act because "Congress is slow." CEOs can and should make decisions about what their companies build or refuse to build. What they cannot do is substitute their judgment for the constitutional processes that govern national security. We must not vest de facto policy control in unelected corporate leaders.
HN should apply their flagging of posts consistently. either flag the politics or not at all.
>If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Would this "open letter" be covered on TV news?
That said, here are some American examples - it is being covered by CBS: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/anthropic-ceo-dario-amodei-full...
And a local affiliate: https://www.cbs8.com/article/news/nation-world/trump-order-a...
And ABC: https://abcnews.com/US/wireStory/anthropic-refuses-bend-pent...
And a local affiliate: https://abc7news.com/post/anthropic-refuses-bend-pentagon-ai...
NBC: https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/trump-bans-anthropic-...
Fox: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/tech-company-refuses-pentag...
Searching "anthropic letter tv news coverage" in Google, the News tab has tons of other mainstream news sources, worldwide, covering this story.
So yes. This and many "technical" stories that appear on HN would be covered by "tv news."
> We hope our leaders will put aside their differences and stand together to continue to refuse the Department of War's current demands for permission to use our models for domestic mass surveillance and autonomously killing people without human oversight. Hope is neat, but are the signatories willing to quit their jobs over this? Kind of a hollow threat if not.
[flagged]
>The executive branch can categorize AI technology as equivalent to nuclear weapons technology. Theoretically, but this would run the risk of collapsing the US tech sector, which at this point is a significant part of the strength of the US economy, and thus making it likely that the Republicans will lose power in the next elections.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s a descriptive statement about the law. But you’re mischaracterizing the normative principle underlying the law. It’s not based on power, but rather the moral duties incumbent on citizens.
>but rather the moral duties incumbent on citizens. Is it a "moral duty" to aid your government, especially in the current social/political environment? Conscription is theoretically still allowed in the US, and you're theoretically supposed to register for the SSS, but nobody has been prosecuted for failure to do so in decades. That suggests the "moral duty" aspect has significantly weakened. Moreover if we're makin…
Conscientious objection still puts the ball in the government’s court. You have to make your case to the government that you have a deeply held religious or moral belief that precludes participation in war, and then the government decides what it wants to do. It’s not clear to me how a corporation would prove the existence of such a belief. But even if that was possible, it wouldn’t give the company the right to decide unilaterally.