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

771–780 of 912 posts

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#771

Post by archydeb »

drewda wrote: post #769
pavel_lishin wrote: post #733

> 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.

They put their names to their position publicly. That is meaningful action.

Well, some did. I was surprised to see so many anonymous signatories.

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#772

Post by direwolf20 »

kelvinjps10 wrote: post #749
direwolf20 wrote: post #687

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

What open source software ? Anthropic doesn't make open source software?

All open source software, because the developers might use Claude Code.

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#773

Post by tyre »

timr wrote: post #534
tyre wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Supply chain risk is not meant for this. The government isn't banning Anthropic because using it harms national security. They are banning it in retribution for Anthropic taking a stand. It's the same as Trump claiming emergency powers to apply tariffs, when the "emergency" he claimed was basically "global trade exists." Yes, the government can choose to purchase or not. No, supply chain risk is absolutely not correc…

The rule in question is exactly meant for “this”, where “this” equals ”a complete ban on use of the product in any part of the government supply chain” . That’s why it has the name that it has. The rule itself has not been misconstrued. You’re really trying to complain that the use of the rule is inappropriate here, which may be true, but is far more a matter of opinion than anything else.

You keep trying to say this all over these comments but this isn’t how the law works, at all.

I fully understand that they are using it to ban things from the supply chain. The law, however, is not “first find the effect you want, then find a law that results in that, then accuse them of that.”

You can’t say someone murdered someone just because you want to put them in jail. You can’t use a law for banning supply chain risks just because you want to ban them from the supply chain.

This isn’t idle opinion. Read the law.

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#774

Post by trinsic2 »

dataflow wrote: post #203

Why are the signing employees (at least the anonymous ones) trusting the creators of this website? What if it was set up by someone who wanted to gather a list of all the dissidents who would silently protest or leave the companies or whatever? Do you know whom you are going to hold accountable if it turns out these folks don't delete your verification data, or share it with your employer, or worse? Also, another war…

Looks like the letter itself appears to be behind a piece of Javascript. I was not able to to see the letter's text with noscript turned on and had to find it elsewhere online. I don't want to discourage these companies employees from banding together to fight this abuse, but this is something to consider.

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#776

Post by raw_anon_1111 »

drewda wrote: post #769
pavel_lishin wrote: post #733

> 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.

They put their names to their position publicly. That is meaningful action.

They wrote a letter. Meaningless. How many are going to quit their highly compensated jobs over it?

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#777

Post by lostlogin »

adventured wrote: post #731
busko wrote: post #546

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, where does your trust lay now? It's been a minute of pretending it'll be okay.

Nothing has changed in decades regarding this. People just like to pretend something new is happening, because they're extremely desperate to proclaim a fundamental turning / ending of the US (which is why every single event brings out those claims: this time is different! America will never recover from this! etc). US tech companies were previously forced into compliance with PRISM or threatened with destruction (se…

> Nothing has changed

> You know what's new? This administration is doing out in the open what used to go on quietly.

So this administration has got bold and the behaviour has become overt.

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#778

Post by torton »

Apparently, OpenAI already folded.

https://www.cnn.com/2026/02/27/tech/openai-pentagon-deal-ai-...

A unified front from tech companies could have stood a chance, but there's too much money to be made and the imbalance of power is too great without departing the area of influence of the US government entirely (and then go where? China, UK, Australia, etc. are equally not shy of coercing commercial capabilities in pursuit of government goals, including military goals).

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#779

Post by lostlogin »

pirate787 wrote: post #766
xerox13ster wrote: post #750

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Your take is a call for civil war. You're obviously wrong about "treason" since even larger majorities voted for Trump in 2024.

How things played out isn’t what decides if it was treason or not.

Re: We Will Not Be Divided

#780

Post by ericmay »

herval wrote: post #761
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.

this entire administration has been a constant stream of "important turning point for the US" moments

I think most, perhaps all of those "important turning points" aren't really important turning points but just business as usual.
Post reply on HN