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. lukewarm707 · 1790356028 · focus · HN ↗

                     i don't understand.

                     it is a supply chain risk, so they don't want it in the supply chain.

                     that's logical.

                     1. hardbass · 1790356206 · focus · HN ↗

                        They can just refuse to entertain contracts with them if they dislike it. Why issue a supply chain risk? Its clear and pure thuggery and blackmail.

                        1. ilikehurdles · 1790356568 · focus · HN ↗

                           How is this a debate? Anthropic's AI was used in military/defense operations. When Anthropic discovered this and disclosed it publicly, they attempted to revoke access and went after the government demanding it not get used in such a way. This would be a supply chain risk to any government.

                           If Lockheed Martin disabled weapons systems when it discovered the Air Force using its fighters over Iranian airspace based on Lockheed's ideological views, I'm pretty sure they would be labeled a supply chain risk at minimum. What is the issue here?

                           1. hardbass · 1790357306 · focus · HN ↗

                              The government canceling that specific contract with Anthropic is fine. It is too vast a scope to deny Anthropic to work with any other companies who also happen to be defense contractors.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.