Live data from Hacker News

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

twitter.com

981–990 of 1001 posts

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

#981
post #816

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or all the stupid shit this regime has done, this is the most sane. They want the department to fight wars. At least they’re being honest.

Except they don’t, because fighting a war requires congressional approval.

No, fighting a war requires only engaging in international armed conflict.

Declaring a war requires Congress, and fighting a war other than in response to an invasion may be illegal under US law if Congress has not exercised its power to declare war, but that doesn't prevent wars from happening it just makes it illegal (though the only actual remedy is impeachment) for the President to wage war without authorization. And, in any case, that’s largely moot because Congress has exercised that power in an open ended (in terms of when and against whom) but limited (in authorized duration of any particular action without subsequent authorization) manner via the War Powers Act, giving every President since Nixon a blank check to start wars with full legal authority and then allow Congress an opportunity to vote to pull support from forces already in combat and hope the enemy already engaged is willing to treat the war as over as the only after-the-fact constraint.

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

#982
post #940

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Europe doesn't have a culture of throwing illimitate money at startups with little hope of getting anything back. Which is probably due to not having petrodollars.

> Europe doesn't have a culture of throwing illimitate money at startups with little hope of getting anything back. Are you implying that venture investors in US have been losing money on IT startups? Care to provide references?

Save for a few notable ones, most startups never make any ROI.

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

#983

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't just unplug the thing and use something else. Obviously the DoD would not want limited use. Strange they don't make their own given their specific needs.

I think this is maybe the most revealing thing about this saga, that seemingly the U.S. government has not been training their own frontier models.

Perhaps getting donations from Altman and "investing" directly in OpenAI is more convenient.

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

#984

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The US is currently an autocracy/idiocracy. A staggeringly corrupt, busted nation. We are in a bad place right now, that is for certain. > Soon enough the midterms will be effectively cancelled. That would be a pretty big leap from where we are. I think it is important to pay attention, and very important to vote, but there is not a particularly plausible route to cancelling any elections. But they can certainly ma…

The midterms are not going to go according to anything like historical precedent. If allowed to function normally, Trump loses, and the whole stack of cards collapses. They know that, and will do literally anything and everything to prevent it. If allowed to get away with it, the US is never coming back. Civil unrest very likely in November.

I don't normally think people would accuse me of being an optimist, but I feel like Trump's influence has lower limits than many people think, and the opposition seems pretty strong. If there are any serious attempts at shenanigans during the midterm elections I think you are right that there would be widespread civil unrest. There are plenty of people willing to fight, especially when the stakes are as high as an actual election.

I think it is actually plausible that in the end, nothing too interesting happens and the elections go off as normal. Trump is a lame duck already, will not be on any future ballots, and I'm certain that GOP politicians know how badly they do on ballots that do not include his name. By the time November rolls around they will be in full CYA mode trying to ensure their own reelection and strategizing on how to mitigate the expected damage in 2028. At the rate Trump is going, we could see a super majority Dem Congress in 2028 and that would be a catastrophe for the GOP. I think they're going to start reining him in. His primary threats for 2028 will not be that convincing.

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

#985

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

ICE is trump building a personal army

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

#986

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The administration's approach to contracts, agreements, treaties and so on could be summed up as 'I am altering the deal. Pray I do not alter it further.' The basic problem in our polity is that we've collectively transferred the guilty pleasure of aligning a charismatic villain in fiction to doing the same in real life. The top echelons of our government are occupied by celebrities and influencers whose expertise is…

And as an aside to this: even the people coopting the rebel iconography are supporting genocide, atrocities and war crimes. Like, Mark Hamill himself is a massive Israel + Biden supporter [0]. Guys, George Lucas didn't make the Empire thinking about Trump, or Republicans. He made it about America. 0 - https://www.nme.com/news/film/hollywood-stars-sign-open-lett...

Ehh, Hamill's take on Israel is pretty middle of the road and diplomatic[1]: support for the people of Palestine and Israel while not at all supporting the governments of those places.

[1] https://xcancel.com/MarkHamill/status/1725979647991537786?la...

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

#987

The disconnect here for me is, I assume the DoW and Anthropic signed a contract at some point and that contract most likely stipulated that these are the things they can do and these are the things they can't do. I would assume the original terms the DoW is now railing against were in those original contracts that they signed. In that case it looks like the DoW is acting in bad faith here, they signed the original co…

I assume those agreements were probably signed before the current fascist regime running the US government and now they want to upend the terms of said agreement to allow in more fascism to aforementioned contract.

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

#988

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This doesn’t erase Claude, and even if it did Gemini and Codex are there to replace it. Even if a ton of companies have to switch over to an alternative, it won’t be catastrophic to the economy.

The stock market will be spooked if the US govt can willy nilly high trajectory darling of the AI world like this though. Who's next? OpenAI? Google? What if they refuse to allow the DoD to use AI with zero safeguards and Trump's goons decide they are also a "supply chain risk"?

In the end we discovered this had nothing to do with safeguards — OpenAI simply bribed them to switch. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47197505

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

#989

This will likely be deeply unpopular but: Good! The place to set policies on the use of hammers and police enforcement is not at the counter of the hardware store. “You want a hammer but don’t have a contractors license? Are you in a training program? Oh you just want to hang framed art - can I see your lease, does it allow hammering metal into the walls?” We govern these things through laws and a democratic process.…

> I don’t want some overconfident Silicon Valley engineering firm telling me how to use my digital tools, and you shouldn’t either.

Last I heard, a US firm can refuse to do business with the US military as a customer in general commercial contexts, there is no blanket legal duty for private companies to sell goods or services to the US military, government agencies do not have a constitutional right to (nor are they a protected category for) the purchase of goods and services from private businesses, and private contracts are voluntary so if either party doesn't like the terms they can decline.

There's the somewhat conscription-y Defense Production Act, but the US goverment making use of that in this case is fundamentally incompatible with them simultaneously declaring the exact same organisation a "supply chain risk". Even without the near simultaneous references to both in this case, it seems to me like the US admin has said:

  WE DEMAND YOU SELL US YOUR STUFF OR WE'LL SHOW YOU BY BANNING OURSELVES FROM BUYING YOUR STUFF!!!!!111
Modulo Trump being more shouty and less coherent, and Hegseth being less shouty.

> To stop mass surveillance and autonomous lethality, pass laws. Asking unelected tech executives to do this is asking for trouble. They have no business doing it.

The US executive appears to consider the US constitution to not bind on them, only on their enemies.

What laws do you think you can pass, when even the constitution is seen that way?

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

#990

The disconnect here for me is, I assume the DoW and Anthropic signed a contract at some point and that contract most likely stipulated that these are the things they can do and these are the things they can't do. I would assume the original terms the DoW is now railing against were in those original contracts that they signed. In that case it looks like the DoW is acting in bad faith here, they signed the original co…

It's so fishy, I spent the morning reading sam'AMA and it's a classic whitewashing act. OpenAI is claiming their setup is stronger and that DOW has agreed to their red lines but read the agreement below, it only says use in compliance with laws and executive order.

Anthropic wouldn't have walked away from a multi million contract if their two redlines could be respected. OpenAI on the other hand is a fast, willing and ready company. I would love to see Anthropic's proposed contract

In our agreement, we protect our red lines through a more expansive, multi-layered approach. We retain full discretion over our safety stack, we deploy via cloud, cleared OpenAI personnel are in the loop, and we have strong contractual protections. This is all in addition to the strong existing protections in U.S. law.

We believe strongly in democracy. Given the importance of this technology, we believe that the only good path forward requires deep collaboration between AI efforts and the democratic process. We also believe our technology is going to introduce new risks in the world, and we want the people defending the United States to have the best tools.

Our agreement includes:

1. Deployment architecture. This is a cloud-only deployment, with a safety stack that we run that includes these principles and others. We are not providing the DoW with “guardrails off” or non-safety trained models, nor are we deploying our models on edge devices (where there could be a possibility of usage for autonomous lethal weapons).

Our deployment architecture will enable us to independently verify that these red lines are not crossed, including running and updating classifiers.

2. Our contract. Here is the relevant language:

The Department of War may use the AI System for all lawful purposes, consistent with applicable law, operational requirements, and well-established safety and oversight protocols. The AI System will not be used to independently direct autonomous weapons in any case where law, regulation, or Department policy requires human control, nor will it be used to assume other high-stakes decisions that require approval by a human decisionmaker under the same authorities. Per DoD Directive 3000.09 (dtd 25 January 2023), any use of AI in autonomous and semi-autonomous systems must undergo rigorous verification, validation, and testing to ensure they perform as intended in realistic environments before deployment.

For intelligence activities, any handling of private information will comply with the Fourth Amendment, the National Security Act of 1947 and the Foreign Intelligence and Surveillance Act of 1978, Executive Order 12333, and applicable DoD directives requiring a defined foreign intelligence purpose. The AI System shall not be used for unconstrained monitoring of U.S. persons’ private information as consistent with these authorities. The system shall also not be used for domestic law-enforcement activities except as permitted by the Posse Comitatus Act and other applicable law.

Post reply on HN