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

Where things stand with the Department of War

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

781–790 of 862 posts

Re: Where things stand with the Department of War

#781

Post by WalterBright »

gzread wrote: post #624
WalterBright wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> classmates refused to work at companies that did let their systems be used for war I don't want to be stuck with horses when the enemy is invading with tanks.

How well do horses fare against tanks - anyone know? Tanks are really big and bulky and I'm sure (well-trained) horses could literally run circles around them, which wouldn't do any good because how would you get through the armor.

A cavalry charge was tried once in the opening days of WW1. A machine gun took care of it. Tanks have machine guns.

P.S. Horses where then relegated to hauling equipment around, not combat. This persisted even into WW2. The Germans used horses extensively for transport. You don't see it much in the documentary films, as the cameramen were instructed to not show the horse drawn stuff. They wanted to present the image that the Wehrmacht was mechanized.

Re: Where things stand with the Department of War

#782

Post by srean »

godelski wrote: post #770
Alan_Writer wrote: post #506

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even God told Abraham to kill his own son. Like, really?

Don't worry, it was just a test of Abraham's loyalty. God was never going to let him kill Isaac. It's the perfect example of a completely ethical thing to do to another person...

Some religious people would be nodding along in agreement not realising this is satire.

Re: Where things stand with the Department of War

#783

Post by WalterBright »

nicoburns wrote: post #527
WalterBright wrote: post #477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Would you consider being a contract killer (i.e. a hitman) ethical? What about being a creator of CSAM? Because those are both examples making money by providing others with what they want. And if we followed free market principles to their logical extreme then both of those would be allowed. I think most people would agree that this would not be even remotely ethical. Nor would it lead to higher living standards tha…

A fundamental requirement for free markets is the absence of use of force or fraud. Another is that it applies only to legally consenting adults.

Both of your examples are not free market examples.

Re: Where things stand with the Department of War

#784

Post by SirMaster »

mindslight wrote: post #326
sirnicolaz wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing is playing Pokemon, one thing is decide who to kill. Also: if they are planning to use it on the field, there is going to be a velocity issue. Claude and any other LLM require a non negligible amount of time to ingest the input and spit the output.

You seem to be under a mistaken impression that there is some good faith and competence here. Fascists don't give a shit about accuracy. Collateral damage actually increases the fear of being mistakenly caught up and encourages those at risk to loudly support the Party hoping it will protect them.

You are saying fascists don't care if it inaccurately targets themselves?

Re: Where things stand with the Department of War

#785

Post by hn_acker »

Mike Masnick's commentary at [1]. (Yes, I'm aware that he used "hostage note" to refer to a note written by a hostage rather than a note written by a hostage-taker.) Key excerpt:

> Under any previous administration—Democrat or Republican—a company telling the Defense Department “we’d prefer our AI not make autonomous kill decisions without human oversight” would have been a mostly unremarkable negotiating position. It might have been a deal breaker for that particular contract. The two sides might have parted ways. What would not have happened is the Secretary of Defense going on social media to accuse the company of “betrayal” and “duplicity,” the President directing all federal agencies to stop using the company’s products, and the company’s CEO subsequently having to write a public groveling statement apologizing for having accurately described the situation while pledging free labor to the government that attacked him.

[1] Anthropic's Statement To The 'Department Of War' Reads Like A Hostage Note Written In Business Casual - https://www.techdirt.com/2026/03/06/anthropics-statement-to-...

Re: Where things stand with the Department of War

#786

Post by WalterBright »

shafyy wrote: post #515
pawkaman84 wrote: post #507

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He was trying to say that "making money in a free-market" is fundamentally linked to creating value for someone. It wasn't the 'money' word that you should have focused on, but the 'value'. On average this way of creating value bottoms-up has undoubtedly produced the largest human flourishing in the history of our species. It has unlocked human creativity and has lifted millions of people from poverty. It is the best…

To add to keiferski's excellent comments: There is no such thing a truly free market. Neoliberalism is just an excuse to not care about things that stand in the way of people making more money or gaining more power. This wealth we have built was not built on a totally free market (whatever that means), but much more social form of capitalism. The countries where there is the least povery and highest standards of livi…

> There is no such thing a truly free market.

Nothing human is perfect. However, history shows us that the more free market an economy is, the more prosperous it is. It doesn't have to be "truly free" to be effective.

In contrast, whenever socialism is tried and it fails, socialists describe it as "not true socialism". Since there is also no such thing as true socialism, the more "true" a socialism is, the more it fails.

Re: Where things stand with the Department of War

#787

Post by WalterBright »

keiferski wrote: post #509
pawkaman84 wrote: post #507

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He was trying to say that "making money in a free-market" is fundamentally linked to creating value for someone. It wasn't the 'money' word that you should have focused on, but the 'value'. On average this way of creating value bottoms-up has undoubtedly produced the largest human flourishing in the history of our species. It has unlocked human creativity and has lifted millions of people from poverty. It is the best…

Here’s what I don’t get, and why these comments irritate me. They are just opportunities for someone to inject their ideological arguments about something that has little to do with the actual comment. I didn’t say anything about capitalism being a bad system, nor did I say making money is inherently bad. I said in the absence of ethical study, making money is treated as a default good. It seems pretty obvious to me…

> no matter what values get ignored

Free markets require no force or fraud, and legal consenting adults.

What values being ignored are you referring to?

Re: Where things stand with the Department of War

#788

Post by the_af »

qsera wrote: post #760
the_af wrote: post #739

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Have you ever gone through a whole a week without eating anything? Have you seen your kids go through that Have you? And did you murder your neighbor to steal their food? Did you believe the best course of action was to fight your neighbors? Your ridiculous analogy doesn't even apply to the US, one of the wealthiest countries in the world. In your imagined scenario, are they the poor starving family who must kill a…

>Have you? I haven't, and that is why I am not making higher-than-you, virtuous claims about how I would act in that situation. Maybe you should do the same. >Your ridiculous analogy doesn't even apply to the US, one of the wealthiest countries in the world And where did that wealth come from? Sure, you have smart people, but it also require a functioning economy to mobilize and convert all those talent into wealth.…

> I haven't, and that is why I am not making higher-than-you [...]

Then maybe stop making up hypotheticals that don't apply to me, you, or any of the nations involved? What are you hoping to achieve here? "Let's assume we live in a Mad Max world, would you steal all the women and water"?

> And where did that wealth come from? Sure, you have smart people, but it also require a functioning economy to mobilize and convert all those talent into wealth

So you think the US doesn't have a functioning economy or smart people, and therefore must resort to war to get their resources?

> BOOM! Back to zero...

So, in your bizarre logic, it's best to resort to theft and murder?

Re: Where things stand with the Department of War

#789

Post by gverrilla »

hglaser wrote: post #18

It is incredible how far the overton window has moved on this issue. When I graduated in 2007, it was common for tech companies to refuse to let their systems be used for war, and it was an ordinary thing when some of my graduating classmates refused to work at companies that did let their systems be used for war. Those refusals were on moral grounds. Now Anthropic wants to have two narrow exceptions, on pragmatic an…

USA is collapsing.

Re: Where things stand with the Department of War

#790

Post by godelski »

komali2 wrote: post #584
DiogenesKynikos wrote: post #557

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Taiwanese government still officially considers itself the government of all of China, not just of Taiwan and a few outlying islands.

This is false. You will finally google this claim you've been repeating without evidence, and realize there's no supporting evidence for this claim. I guarantee it, because there is no evidence for this claim .

Honestly it doesn't even matter if true or false, their logic is flawed. We could just swap China/Taiwan for the Koreas and it would still be dumb. Clearly they have independent governing bodies even though they both claim the other is an illegitimate ruling party.

The patent is either trolling or delusional. Best to waste no more time

Post reply on HN