Thread

1. ctippett · 1790355495 · focus · HN ↗

   Admittedly I still need to do some reading on the current ruling, but how this isn't seen as an open and shut case of vindictive prosecution (if that's even a thing for this branch of law?) is astounding. The administration couldn't have made it more obvious there was no merit to their designation of Anthropic.

   1. 1234letshaveatw · 1790355864 · focus · HN ↗

      [dead]

      1. ctippett · 1790356122 · focus · HN ↗

         I'm not even sure your comment warrants a response, but surely you can't have meant that as a response to my comment?

         1. 1234letshaveatw · 1790359879 · focus · HN ↗

            Sure did- Anthropics behavior absolutely merits their designation. Private sector leadership is going to decide how the military should act? They are shirking their civic duties, plain and simple and the use of their tech should certainly be called into question.

            1. ctippett · 1790361772 · focus · HN ↗

               If you attempt a less adversarial tone with your comments you'll be less likely to get flagged and you might actually get to have the substantive discussion you're clearly impassioned to have.

               1. 1234letshaveatw · 1790695013 · focus · HN ↗

                  Nah- I am satisfied with the discussion that took place.

                  1. ctippett · 1790708623 · focus · HN ↗

                     Low bar. Aim higher.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.