Thread

1. HarHarVeryFunny · 1790354450 · focus · HN ↗

   Supply chain risk seems a massive over-reaction, but understandable that the government doesn't want to commit to Anthropic controlled software for any critical military application if they can't 100% rely on Anthropic support in being able to use it as they see fit.

   1. ajross · 1790354876 · focus · HN ↗

      > understandable that the government doesn't want to commit to Anthropic controlled software

      But that's not at issue here. Obviously everyone agrees that the Pentagon can issue RFQ's to whatever specifications it wants. They can buy whatever they want, for the same reason that you or I are free to sell whatever we want.

      The subject at hand is an attempt to use national security regulatory power to coerce Anthropic into selling a product it doesn't want to sell.

      1. parineum · 1790357436 · focus · HN ↗

         How is this coersion?

         Is it coersion when people refuse to buy anything but free range chicken eggs?

         DoD just refuses to buy a product. Anthropic just lost a customer because their product didn't fit the requirements of the customer.

         1. Jtsummers · 1790365596 · focus · HN ↗

            > DoD just refuses to buy a product.

            That's not what happened. DOD bought a product, with terms precluding specific applications of the product. DOD decided to change the terms, vendor said no. DOD threw a hissyfit (well, Hegseth did) and said, "No one can use it if they do business with us!"

            If they had just terminated their contracts with Anthropic, then there would likely be no issue beyond having to pay out any penalties for terminating a contract early. They could then go to Grok (as they did) and OpenAI and used them instead. Or even kept the contract with Anthropic and its limitations, and just used the others for the cases where Anthropic was not permitted.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.