Thread

1. petcat · 1790353704 · focus · HN ↗

   I still don't fully understand what this was about. It sounds like the DoD said they wanted unrestricted access to Anthropic's models, Anthropic refused, so the Pentagon declared that they wouldn't use them at all.

   Isn't this basically what Anthropic wanted?

   1. sippingabonedry · 1790354258 · focus · HN ↗

      [dead]

      1. kittikitti · 1790354953 · focus · HN ↗

         Especially since Anthropic themselves have been literally saying that AI might destroy humanity. Why is it a surprise when people take them at their word and designate them a risk to critical infrastructure?

         Side note, the Anthropic bots are astroturfing the comments.

         1. hardbass · 1790355054 · focus · HN ↗

            I hate communism. I am not a shill for any company. Governments blackmailing private companies is bad no matter what company.

            1. lukewarm707 · 1790355383 · focus · HN ↗

               personally, i think that anthropic is a supply chain risk. if the ceo writes 'pace the frontier' and wants to be in charge of the product, it's very risky (to the customer).

               anthropic treat customers very badly. they have claude lecture the user about the moral law according to anthropic. they change the product all the time. they have safety refusals to degrade functionality, they have mandatory logging so they spy on how it is used.

               it's unusable for a serious application.

               1. hardbass · 1790355794 · focus · HN ↗

                  Irrelevant. Then the government should just refrain from taking the contract, not use violent force to restrict Anthropic doing business.

                  1. ilikehurdles · 1790356214 · focus · HN ↗

                     Correct, from the government's perspective, anthropic is a risk to the supply chain and should not be included in sensitive government contracts.

                     1. hardbass · 1790357232 · focus · HN ↗

                        Thats too vast a scope. Whats not to say they start enforcing bans on Anthropic in any branch or usage of Anthropic of your company if your company has entered into a defense contract with the government for something?

                        1. lukewarm707 · 1790357699 · focus · HN ↗

                           they should ban it, defense contractors shouldn't be using it XD.

                           fable 5.1 doesn't have any option to stop anthropic spying on it. you can't have that...anthropic contractors and actually the rationalist ea clowns themselves don't have security clearance

                           1. hardbass · 1790358003 · focus · HN ↗

                              Just saying so doesn't mean shit. The US government should ban you then because I deem you a risk and a terrorist threat.

                              1. lukewarm707 · 1790358698 · focus · HN ↗

                                 i say it, but you can confirm it yourself.

                                 not even AWS govcloud can offer fable without anthropic snooping. it is the only model with this problem.

                                 the pentagon can't force suppliers to require no snooping policies unless they designate the company a risk.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.