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

Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 1001 posts

Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

#81

Post by madrox »

mvkel wrote: post #32

Good optics, but ultimately fruitless. If preventing mass surveillance or fully autonomous weaponry is a -policy- choice and not a technical impossibility, this just opens the door for the department of war to exploit backdoors, and anthropic (or any ai company) can in good conscience say "Our systems were unknowingly used for mass surveillance," allowing them to save face. The only solution is to make it technically…

I think it is a reasonable moral stance to acknowledge such things are possible, yet not wanting to be a part of it. Regarding making it technically impossible to do...I think that is what Anthropic means when they say they want to develop guardrails.

Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

#82

Post by easton »

alach11 wrote: post #50

A significant part of Anthropic's cachet as an employer is the ethical stance they profess to take. This is no doubt a tough spot to be in, but it's hard to see Dario making any other decision here. What I don't understand is why Hegseth pushed the issue to an ultimatum like this. They say they're not trying to use Claude for domestic mass surveillance or autonomous weapons. If so, what does the Department of War hav…

It’s not unusual for legal departments to take offense to these sorts of things, because now everyone using Claude within the DoD has to do some kind of audit to figure out if they’re building something that could be construed as surveillance or autonomous weapons (or, what controls are in place to prevent your gun from firing when Claude says, etc). A lot of paperwork.

My guess is they just don’t want to bother. I wonder why they specifically need Claude when their other vendors are willing to sign their terms, unless it specifically needs to run in AWS or something for their “classified networks” requirement.

Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

#84

Post by cogman10 »

1024core wrote: post #39
flumpcakes wrote: post #20

This is such a depressing read. What is becoming of the USA? Let's hope sanity prevails and the next election cycle can bring in some competent non-grievance based leadership.

[flagged]

In a nutshell, this is the problem with mainstream dems (and I include Newsom in this) looks an appearance matters a lot more than actual policy leadership.

The policies that actually affect people's lives, there's a lot of overlap for both mainstream dems and republicans.

I live in Idaho, and school teacher here are also extremely underpaid (My kid's teachers all have second jobs). Yet our state has magically found $40M to give away to private school while it's also asking the public schools to find 2% of their budgets to cut.

In I think both cases, the solution is simple, give the teachers a raise and probably raise taxes to pay for it. However, both parties are fairly anemic to the "raise taxes" portion of the message and so they instead look for other dumb flashy one time things they can do instead.

Federal democrats have relied way too heavily on Republicans being a villain and vague "hope and change" promises to carry them through an election cycle. They need to actually "change" things and not just maintain the status quo when they get power.

Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

#85

Post by altpaddle »

qaid wrote: post #62

I was reading halfway thru and one line struck a nerve with me: > But today, frontier AI systems are simply not reliable enough to power fully autonomous weapons. So not today, but the door is open for this after AI systems have gathered enough "training data"? Then I re-read the previous paragraph and realized it's specifically only criticizing > AI-driven domestic mass surveillance And neither denounces partially a…

Unfortunately I think the writing is clearly on the wall. Fully autonomous weapons are coming soon

Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

#86

Post by inigyou »

davidw wrote: post #70
flumpcakes wrote: post #20

This is such a depressing read. What is becoming of the USA? Let's hope sanity prevails and the next election cycle can bring in some competent non-grievance based leadership.

This isn't a one-election thing. It's going to be a generational effort to fix what these people are breaking more of every day. I hope I live to see it come to some kind of fruition - I recently turned 50.

Some people are calling it the "American century of humiliation"

No other country that went through a phase like this has ever recovered. Not even in a century.

Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

#87

Post by caaqil »

_cenw wrote: post #24

As a "foreign national", what's the deal with making the distinction between domestic mass surveillance and foreign mass surveillance? Are there no democracies aside from the US? Don't we know since Snowden that if the US wants to do domestic surveillance they'll just ask GCHQ to share their "foreign" surveillance capabilities?

[flagged]

Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

#88

Post by ks2048 »

_cenw wrote: post #24

As a "foreign national", what's the deal with making the distinction between domestic mass surveillance and foreign mass surveillance? Are there no democracies aside from the US? Don't we know since Snowden that if the US wants to do domestic surveillance they'll just ask GCHQ to share their "foreign" surveillance capabilities?

Also the more the US openly treats the world like garbage, the more the rest of the world will likely reciprocate to US citizens.

It reminds me of some recent horror stories at border crossings - harassing people and requiring giving up all your data on your phone - sets a terrible precedent.

Re: Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

#89

Post by willmorrison »

They essentially said "we're not fans of mass surveilance of US citizens and we won't use CURRENT models to kill people autonomously" and people are saying they're taking a stand and doing the right thing? What???

I guess they're evil. Tragic.

Post reply on HN