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

I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

861–870 of 1001 posts

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#861

Post by fluidcruft »

spuz wrote: post #717
fluidcruft wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anthropic didn't even say "no", it was more of a "not yet, let's work on this". I really wonder what Palantir's role in all this is because domestic surveillance sounds exactly like Palantir and whatever happened during the Maduro raid led to Anthropic asking Palantir questions which the news reports is the snowball that escalated to this.

Could you expand on that Anthropic asking Palantir connection to this?

This is a summary from Gemini of the news reporting:

Recent news reports from February 2026 indicate that a significant rift developed between Anthropic and the Department of War (Pentagon) following the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in January 2026.

According to a report by the Wall Street Journal (referenced by TRT World and others on February 14–15, 2026), the controversy originated when an Anthropic employee contacted a counterpart at Palantir Technologies to inquire about how Claude had been used during the raid. Key Details of the Reports:

* Discovery of Use: Anthropic reportedly became aware that its AI model, Claude, was used in the classified military operation through its existing partnership with Palantir. This was allegedly the first time an Anthropic model was confirmed to be involved in a high-profile, classified kinetic operation.

* The Inquest: The Wall Street Journal and Semafor reported that an Anthropic staff member reached out to Palantir to ask for specifics on Claude's role. This inquiry reportedly "triggered the current crisis" because it signaled to the Pentagon that Anthropic was attempting to monitor or place "ad hoc" limits on how its technology was being used in active missions.

* The Confrontation: During a recent meeting between Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, the inquiry to Palantir was a point of contention. Hegseth reportedly claimed Anthropic had raised concerns directly to Palantir about the Caracas raid. Amodei has since denied that the company raised objections to specific operations, characterizing the exchange with Palantir as a routine technical follow-up or a "self-serving characterization" by Palantir.

* Current Status: This friction has escalated into a public showdown. Today, Friday, February 27, 2026, reports indicate that the Trump administration has officially designated Anthropic a "supply chain risk" and ordered federal agencies to cease using Claude after the company refused to remove guardrails related to autonomous weaponry and mass domestic surveillance.

The primary reporting you are likely recalling comes from The Wall Street Journal (approx. February 14, 2026) and was later expanded upon by Semafor regarding the specific communications between Anthropic and Palantir employees.

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#862

Post by skissane »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #822
skissane wrote: post #809

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If Trump can do this to Anthropic, a Dem President will do it to xAI. We have no idea where the contagion stops. Will the next Democratic President do it to xAI? On what grounds? The Biden admin negotiated a contract with a supplier with terms which are – to the best of my knowledge – rather unprecedented – do Pentagon contracts normally have terms like this, restricting the government's use of the supplied good or…

> Will the next Democratic President do it to xAI? On what grounds? Elon being affiliated with Trump. About the strength of logic that makes Dario woke. > don't think that's the norm Norms are different from law or contract. And yes, lots of service providers limit where their civilians can be deployed and under what circumstances. > can totally understand the political desire for vengeance. But what's the actual leg…

> Elon being affiliated with Trump. About the strength of logic that makes Dario woke.

I think you have to distinguish between the official justification and some of the associated political rhetoric.

Official justification: "Previous admin agreed contract with unprecedented terms, we demand those terms be removed, vendor is refusing to renegotiate"

Political rhetoric: "THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA WILL NEVER ALLOW A RADICAL LEFT, WOKE COMPANY TO DICTATE HOW OUR GREAT MILITARY FIGHTS AND WINS WARS!"

If you forget about the political framing, and look at the official justification in the abstract, it doesn't actually seem facially unreasonable. The escalation to "supply chain risk" is a different story, but the core contract dispute and cancelling the contract as a result of it isn't.

So the question is, can Democrats come up with an equivalent abstract official justification–if so, what will it be? Or do they decide they don't even need that–in which case they aren't just matching Trump, they are going even further down the road to normlessness than he's gone.

> And yes, lots of service providers limit where their civilians can be deployed and under what circumstances.

There's a big difference between contracts for boots-on-the-ground and contracts for hardware/software. There is lots of precedent for contractual limitations on how boots-on-the-ground can be used. I'm not aware of similar precedent for hardware or software.

> That hasn't worked. The American electorate is looking for change. And up-and-coming Democrats are picking up on that.

Are they? Gavin Newsom? Zohran Mamdani? AOC? Do they actually sell themselves as "we see Trump breaking the rules, and we'll break them just as hard, even moreso"?

> The Democrat base absolutely wants vengeance. It doesn't play in swing states. But it probably also doesn't hurt.

It is too early to tell. You can argue in the abstract that X approximately equals Y, so if swing voters will tolerate the GOP doing X, they'll also tolerate Democrats doing Y – but the actual swing voters might not agree with you on that.

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#863

Post by overfeed »

skeeter2020 wrote: post #181
Hamuko wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have my doubts about Anthropic wanting to pick up and move the entire company to Europe even if Ursula von der Leyen personally signed their visas. Maybe only if the government tried to nationalise their proprietary models.

doesn't the Defense Production Act essentially do that?

So, is Anthropic a threat to, or indispensable to National Security? You can't have it both ways. The US used to act like a nation with the rule of law, anyone cheering for the erosion will be hit by the downstream effects sooner or later, amd they will not like it.

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#864

Post by alephnerd »

hyperpape wrote: post #804
alephnerd wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Contractors can still use Claude internally in their business, so long as it is not used in government work directly. I work in the enterprise SaaS and cybersecurity industry. There is no way to guarantee that amongst any FedRAMP vendor (which is almost every cybersecurity and enterprise SaaS or on their roadmap). Almost all FedRAMP products I've built, launched, sold, or funded were the same build as the commerica…

> If Walmart can forcibly add verbiage banning AWS from it's vendors and suppliers, the US government absolutely can. You can add new language to new contracts. That is not what this is.

FedRAMP contracts require all inputs being FedRAMP compliant and a vetted BOM. Anthropic is no longer FedRAMP high and because it is declared a supply chain risk now all our FedRAMP contracts are at risk and any company who has FedRAMP customers is at risk too.

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#865

Post by DannyBee »

techblueberry wrote: post #452
thewebguyd wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not entirely true. The designation only applies to projects that touch the federal government, or software developed specifically for the federal government. Contractors can still use Claude internally in their business, so long as it is not used in government work directly. A complete ban would be adding Anthropic to the NDAA, which requires congress. The DoD designation allows the DoD to make contractors certify th…

The language in the tweet was " Effective immediately, no contractor, supplier, or partner that does business with the United States military may conduct any commercial activity with Anthropic." Is that just his fantasy or?

Lawyer here - this is legally fantasy, but socially not?

Anybody with significant contracts with the DOD is not going to use anthropic because they want to keep getting contracts with the DOD.

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#866

Post by SauntSolaire »

Loughla wrote: post #639
Wowfunhappy wrote: post #545

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Playing devil's advocate: if I did in fact grab one of my kitchen knives to defend myself against a violent intruder into my kitchen, I wouldn't expect to be banned from buying kitchen knives. I'm not sure this is still a useful analogy, though...

If I shoot someone, something that is explicitly warned against in firearm safety materials that come with every purchase of a new firearm, I am no longer allowed to purchase any more firearms.

There are many situations in which you can shoot someone and still be allowed to buy a gun.

Also, in the cases you can't, it's generally the government stopping you, not the gun companies.

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#867

Post by anigbrowl »

thomassmith65 wrote: post #343
jonplackett wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For these people, it is just about control.

Future Trump rally: "And I hear Anthropic monkeyed with their dishonest chatbot Claude. They turned it Democrat! They trained it to say we lost the election against Sleepy Joe!"

You shouldn't be downvoted for this absolutely plausible prediction.

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#868

Post by buttercraft »

charcircuit wrote: post #853
anigbrowl wrote: post #817

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is Anthropic required to sell to the government even if doesn't want to, and is willing to give up its government contracts rather than change its terms of use?

Anthropic is free to not sell to the government.

That is apparently false given this situation

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#869

Post by ajam1507 »

pinkmuffinere wrote: post #813

It's fascinating to me that this decision was set for 5 pm ET on a friday, and I think it may be more responsible to set big deadlines like this for a time while the stock market is open. I imagine this will negatively impact confidence in the US economy at large, and stock markets will reflect that. But since the market is closed, we'll have to wait till Monday, with the tension/anticipation of a drop building. If t…

It's extremely common to release negative news on Friday after the markets close. It happens nearly every Friday.

Re: I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a supply-chain risk

#870

Post by bigtex88 »

mustardo wrote: post #854
gentleman11 wrote: post #742

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump doesn't want another election to happen. He needs some powerful tools to ensure that happens, ie, massive scale ai surveillance and manipulation. Eg, like Xi uses in China. I bet anyone here he starts a war as his excuse

In an interview with Zelinsky Trump asks "why haven't you had an election? " Zelensky : "because we are at war" you can see the idea percolating then. People think I'm a nutter for suggesting there just won't be another election but that's where my money is. I'm waiting for his version of the Gestapo, ICE seems to be a proving ground

You're not a nutter. Trump constantly projects what he's going to do and no one takes him seriously because what he says is so beyond the pale. I explicitly remember the exact instance you're talking about because I thought the same thing as you are thinking.
Post reply on HN