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

Anthropic irks White House with limits on models’ use

semafor.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 145 posts

Re: Anthropic irks White House with limits on models’ use

#81

Post by chankstein38 »

FortuneIIIPick wrote: post #58
vkou wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two of them jump at the command one the other one, one out of fear (because he has ended the careers of every rep that has crossed him), and the other has been packed with life-time-appointment sycophants who put loyalty to the cut over anything else. Russia (or literally any other dictatorial tyre pyre) also has three branches of government and a token opposition, for all the good it does. Just because you have a ni…

[flagged]

I always think it's funny how people who have strong opinions based on nothing love to out themselves by just repeating that something is fact. clap clap We're all convinced, for sure! ;)

Re: Anthropic irks White House with limits on models’ use

#82

Post by ricardobeat »

FortuneIIIPick wrote: post #58
vkou wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two of them jump at the command one the other one, one out of fear (because he has ended the careers of every rep that has crossed him), and the other has been packed with life-time-appointment sycophants who put loyalty to the cut over anything else. Russia (or literally any other dictatorial tyre pyre) also has three branches of government and a token opposition, for all the good it does. Just because you have a ni…

[flagged]

How do you explain Trump unilaterally renaming the Ministry of Defense, without legislative approval? Is it a “working branch” if their constitutionally granted power is easily sidestepped?

Re: Anthropic irks White House with limits on models’ use

#83

Post by otterley »

chankstein38 wrote: post #81
FortuneIIIPick wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I always think it's funny how people who have strong opinions based on nothing love to out themselves by just repeating that something is fact. clap clap We're all convinced, for sure! ;)

It's straight out of Charlie Kirk's playbook.

Re: Anthropic irks White House with limits on models’ use

#84

Post by 9dev »

jschveibinz wrote: post #41
LeoPanthera wrote: post #11

One of the very few tech companies who have refused to bend the knee to the United States' current dictatorial government.

[flagged]

I don’t get this notion. Politics has a place on HN like any other interesting topic does, whether you like it or not

Re: Anthropic irks White House with limits on models’ use

#85

Post by otterley »

arrozconcosas wrote: post #69
otterley wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not a fact, because it depends upon a subjective interpretation of the word “working.” Some might argue, for example, that if the President can cow Congress into subservience, then the three branches of government are no longer in balance with each other, and thus the constitution is no longer “working” as intended.

It can be true that the constitution is not working as intended, AND the US is a far cry from a country like Russian in terms of it operating as a constitutional republic / democracy. It is not subjective to say the US is more of a democratic country than Russia.

I think Russia was being used as an extreme example. It wasn't being lauded as a model nation, far from it.

Re: Anthropic irks White House with limits on models’ use

#86

Post by anjel »

matula wrote: post #22
impossiblefork wrote: post #12

Very strange writing from semafor.com >For instance, an agency could pay for a subscription or negotiate a pay-per-use contract with an AI provider, only to find out that it is prohibited from using the AI model in certain ways, limiting its value. This is of course quite false. They of course know the restriction when they sign the contract.

There are (or at least WERE) entire divisions dedicated to reading every letter of the contract and terms of service, and usually creating 20 page documents seeking clarification for a specific phrase. They absolutely know what they're getting into.

I have a legal education but reading TOS and priv policy docs at account creation is purposefully too time consuming by design.

One my fave new AI prompts: you are my Atty and a expert in privacy law and online contracts-of-adhesion. Review the TOS aggreement at [url] and privacy policies at [url] and brief me on all areas that should be of concern to me.

Takes 90 seconds from start to finish, and reveals how contemptuously illusory these agreements are when SO MANY reserve the right to change anything with no duty to disclose changes.

Re: Anthropic irks White House with limits on models’ use

#87

Post by otterley »

ricardobeat wrote: post #82
FortuneIIIPick wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

How do you explain Trump unilaterally renaming the Ministry of Defense, without legislative approval? Is it a “working branch” if their constitutionally granted power is easily sidestepped?

Do you mean the Department of Defense? The U.S. doesn't have ministries.

Re: Anthropic irks White House with limits on models’ use

#88

Post by gowld »

_9ptr wrote: post #70
axus wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A classic: THIS SOFTWARE PRODUCT MAY CONTAIN SUPPORT FOR PROGRAMS WRITTEN IN JAVA. JAVA TECHNOLOGY IS NOT FAULT TOLERANT AND IS NOT DESIGNED, MANUFACTURED, OR INTENDED FOR USE OR RESALE AS ONLINE CONTROL EQUIPMENT IN HAZARDOUS ENVIRONMENTS REQUIRING FAILSAFE PERFORMANCE, SUCH AS IN THE OPERATION OF NUCLEAR FACILITIES, AIRCRAFT NAVIGATION OR COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS, AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL, DIRECT LIFE SUPPORT MACHINES, OR…

I never knew Java was so dangerous

Everything is dangerous by default. That's the point.

Re: Anthropic irks White House with limits on models’ use

#89

Post by g42gregory »

e_i_pi_2 wrote: post #71
g42gregory wrote: post #60

No judgement here, but a US-based corporation refusing services to the US Government? While the terms of service are what they are, the US Government can withdraw its military contracts from Anthropic (or refuse future contracts if they don't have any so far). Or softly suggest to its own contractors to limit their business dealings with Anthropic. Then Anthropic will have hard time securing computing from NVIDIA, AW…

I'm sure this sort of unofficial blacklisting is fairly common, but it does seem very opposed to the idea of a free market. It definitely doesn't seem like Anthropic was trying to make some sort of point here, but it would be cool if all the AI companies had a ToS saying it can't be used for any sort of defense/police/military purposes

I am not even sure what free market is, aside from Economics textbooks and foreign policy positioning. Whatever it may be, I don't think we had it for quite some time.
Post reply on HN