112 pointsby KnuthIsGod6 hours ago15 comments
  • notepad0x902 minutes ago
    If only a time traveling robot and his human companions were to pay a visit to decision makers at claude(aka cyberdyne? :) ).

    What are they using it for though? Target selection for precise strikes? I'm guessing their argument will be less lives will be lost if claude assisted with making sure the attacks were surgically precise?

  • cyrusradfaran hour ago
    Something is deeply troubling when a company proclaims: "We want to protect people" and the government response is "we can't work with you"

    The fact that there are countless use cases for real government efficiency to help the people they would sacrifice because Anthropic wanted to refuse killer robots is baffling.

    • Spivak30 minutes ago
      In a way its a testament that the safeguards are working for someone because it seems like the internet at large is full of bypasses.
  • BLKNSLVR3 hours ago
    More government intervention in private enterprise? This pattern seems to be gathering steam, does that mean they're now subscribing to this model?

    Or is this just par for the course and has always been going on, it's just the reporting is different, or the current context makes it more of a sensitive topic?

    • tototrains3 hours ago
      No, this is very unusual. The US government taking a 10% stake in intel is very unsual.

      There have been a few cases where national security has prompted the government to nationalize private institutions: the Railroads in WWI, steel mills in the korean war, CINB which was deemed a security risk by being too large a bank.

      This admin has so far acted like a kleptocracy and, like, because of the Epstein files if they lose power many will go to jail, so there's a huge incentive to remain in power.

      Wars are good for remaining in power. Dictatorship is good for remaining in power.

      This is all very, very, very unusual in US history (except maybe when businesses tried to overthrow the government in the 30s but we don't talk about that).

      • 5o1ecist2 hours ago
        > (except maybe when businesses tried to overthrow the government in the 30s but we don't talk about that)

        That doesn't feel familiar at all! This clearly is just yet another wrong, completely bonkers conspiracy-theory! Just like all the others! No cheese pizza eating billionaires would ever even think of this!

    • dillona2 hours ago
      Yes, the government pays (lots of money) for Claude Gov that they use on their networks.

      In my experience they very much do not want to be told what they can and can not do with the things they purchase. I’m surprised the deal got done at all with these restrictions in place.

      • BLKNSLVR2 hours ago
        Purchasing a service is different from purchasing the company, though.

        As such I agree with the surprise at the deal getting done at all.

  • SoftTalker3 hours ago
    I love watching the plot lines of The Terminator play out in real life.
    • mbxy2 hours ago
      Isn't it neat.. I mean stupid.

      I saw a quote today from Vonnegut: "We’ll go down in history as the first society that wouldn’t save itself because it wasn’t cost-effective."

  • hansvm3 hours ago
    It's been all of 3 days since Claude decided to delete a large chunk of my codebase as part of implementing a feature (couldn't get it to work, so it deleted everything triggering errors). I think Anthropic is right to hold the line on not letting the current generation delete people.
    • notepad0x90a minute ago
      You didn't use git with a remote repo? or did it somehow delete the repos, or perhaps you didn't commit and checkout into a feature branch before it ran?
    • AlexCoventry2 hours ago
      I'm not blaming you, but it's scary how many people are running these agents as if they were trusted entities.
    • BLKNSLVR2 hours ago
      Unfortunately I think the 'death by algorithm' rubicon has already been crossed, even by the US.
  • h4kunamataan hour ago
    Read: The USA as usual doesn't like when a company doesn't give what they want.

    Awwwnnnn poor thing :)

    It is like the USA big techs mad because the Chinese AI companies are stealing their data just like, wait for it, how the USA big techs stole the data from artists worldwide to train their models.

    The sweet payback in the name of every single artist/company that have been affected by USA greedy.

    Karma is a btch!

  • nitwit0052 hours ago
    Feels like they'll use it for purposes Anthropic didn't approve of, and then turn around and blame them when it turns out asking ChatGPT to determine which ships are hostile was a bad idea.
  • jmward014 hours ago
    "Until this week, however, Anthropic’s Claude product was the only model permitted for use in the military’s classified systems."

    I hadn't realized. This does make me consider using alternatives more.

  • chid2 hours ago
    Kind of wild given the outcome appears to be https://time.com/7380854/exclusive-anthropic-drops-flagship-...
    • Sebgueran hour ago
      utterly unrelated, the RSP had nothing to do with their usage terms and was entirely about research and release of high-capability models.
  • gaigalas3 hours ago
    All of this is kind of weird.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cjrq1vwe73po

    > the Pentagon official told the BBC the current conflict between the agency and Anthropic is unrelated to the use of autonomous weapons or mass surveillance.

    > The official added that the Pentagon would simultaneously label Anthropic as a supply chain risk.

    *Supply chain risk*?

    The BBC article seems to imply that the government wants to audit Anthropic.

    This, coming at the same time those "distillation" claims were published, is all incredibly suspicious.

    • thephyber3 hours ago
      All of the coverage of this is about the negotiation points of Anthropic vs Pentagon.

      Anthropic doesn’t want their software used for certain purposes, so they maintain approval/denial of projects and actions. I suspect the Pentagon doesn’t want limitations AND they dislike paying for software/service which can be withheld from them if they are found to be skirting the contractual terms.

      And THAT is why the Pentagon is using maximum leverage (threatening Anthropic as a supply chain risk label).

    • hn_throwaway_993 hours ago
      Supply chain risk is a very specific designation, meaning not only would Anthropic lose Pentagon contracts, but no other company with Pentagon contracts would be allowed to use them either. It would have the effect of being a near industry-wide blackballing of Anthropic given all the major companies that have contracts with the DoD.
      • gaigalas3 hours ago
        Yes. Incredible, isn't it? I'm curious at what would make the government do that.
        • thephyber3 hours ago
          _The Art of the Deal_.

          The US federal government is no longer a good faith actor acting on behalf of American citizens and following US law, but now an autonomous corporation aiming to “get the best deal” via maximum leverage.

  • KnuthIsGod2 hours ago
    Claude is now the official LLM for Sauron and his killers.
  • 2 hours ago
    undefined
  • trlakh2 hours ago
    As long as The Boring Company can drill a private Mount Cheyenne bunker in some granite mountain for the billionaires and a new bunker is constructed under the Silicon Valley financed White House ballroom for the politicians, everything is just fine.

    Hegseth and Rubio already live on a military base because they are afraid.

  • SpicyLemonZest4 hours ago
    It's inexcusable that the AI companies have not formed a united front against this. I've been skeptical of the idea that OpenAI leadership is outright MAGA, but even pure self-interest does not explain staying silent while the Pentagon demands autonomous killbots.
    • Sebguer4 hours ago
      Brockman donated 25,000,000 dollars to the MAGA superpac, how much more 'outright' would you like him to be, haha.
      • LarsDu883 hours ago
        This is not only a big donation. It is actually the BIGGEST donation by any single individual.
      • cyanydeez3 hours ago
        Shareholder value and MAGA value are a venn diagram of optical illusion.
      • SpicyLemonZest4 hours ago
        He claimed, and until today I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, that he was trying to curry favor with a notoriously bribe-able President. Not exactly a paragon of moral virtue, but I wouldn't be able to do business with nearly any company in the US if I made that a dealbreaker. This clears the bar where I'm willing to cut ties and demand that everyone else do the same.
        • _aavaa_3 hours ago
          We must join with him, we must join with Sauron.
          • tototrains3 hours ago
            Sauron might win, don't want to risk being on the wrong side of the post-apocalypse
            • BLKNSLVR2 hours ago
              Just because you're on Sauron's side when it wins, doesn't mean you'll be on Sauron's side at any other point in the future.

              One of the things I find interesting about classifying literally any kind of trait within bounds of 'normality', and the culling / suppressing / discouragement of anything outside of that definition, is that there will just be new 'edges', and in short order these edges will be 'other', suddenly outside the definition because times are bad and it has to be someone's fault.

              And so an ad infinitum until the single supreme ruler is the one entity representative of normal, atop a mountain of dead abominations.

              • 5o1ecist2 hours ago
                > One of the things I find interesting about classifying literally any kind of trait within bounds of 'normality', and the culling / suppressing / discouragement of anything outside of that definition, is that there will just be new 'edges'

                There is a general rule I've discovered many years ago, through playing EVE ONLINE and learning understanding how society works. Not the modern EVE ONLINE, the old EVE ONLINE. It was really good for that.

                Every new generation grows up with a new norm. Whenever hardship or challenges are being removed, then the new generation, having never needed to learn how to deal with them, will have a lower tolerance of them in general.

                Your "new edges" generally aren't actually new. They've always been there. It was just that nobody really cared, because they weren't the end of the world: People knew worse.

                It's a self-destructive downwards spiral.