| ▲ | hirako2000 6 hours ago |
| It isn't about commercial agreements, it's about patriotism. The national industry is supposed to submit to the military's wishes to the extent that they get compensated. Here it's a question or virtue. The Pentagon feels it isn't Anthropic to set boundaries as to how their tech is used (for defense) since it can't force its will, then it bans doing business with them. |
|
| ▲ | corford 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| If anthropic is saying “you can use our models for anything other than domestic spying or autonomous weapons” and the pentagon replies “we will use other models then”, I'd say Anthropic are the patriots here... |
| |
| ▲ | 6510 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | I like the endless consideration for spying on allies. or wait... | | |
|
|
| ▲ | Loughla 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I'm guessing you're being down voted because people don't know if you think that's a good thing or not. I do not think it's a good thing. Do you? |
| |
| ▲ | hirako2000 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I absolutely do not think that's a good thing. Was stating some sad facts. | | |
| ▲ | Loughla 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | I had the same thing happen to me when I posted about how unbridled capitalism requires external costs in the form of pollution and what not. I didn't make it clear that I thought it was a terrible truth. Once the hive decides you're being serious without checking, they turn the down vote button into an I disagree with you button. This is actually one of the reasons I left Reddit. I hate to see it here. | | |
| ▲ | YeezyMode 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | It likely helps to take in the cultural moment or context around the statements or the nature of the statements you're making. It's fine to state a fact but it's also helpful to make it clear whether you are saying "it is what it is " or "I wish things were different" or "I am doing X, Y, and Z to try and help and I recommend others do so". Jokes are an exception and I think misunderstandings are fine there. But it's unreasonable to think that on the Internet, people will "check to see if you are serious". |
|
| |
| ▲ | roysting 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I really don’t like how people cannot express themselves without a mob dogpiling. I may not agree with what people say and it seems like he may have just been kidding or was being sarcastic, but he should be allowed to say it without being bullied and abused by downvotes. I hope everyone will reconsider their ways. | | |
| ▲ | tastyface 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Personally, I'd like to do everything in my power to make nationalists feel unwelcome on this site. (But I think OP was merely being descriptive.) | |
| ▲ | SpicyLemonZest 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | braincat31415 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Bravo. It does take real courage to bully people anonymously while safely posting from your mom's basement. | | |
| ▲ | SpicyLemonZest an hour ago | parent [-] | | I fully acknowledge that it doesn't take much courage to bully people anonymously on HN. I don't claim to have any deep well of courage in real life either - many of my friends were already radicalized against OpenAI for other reasons, I don't expect to face professional consequences for being angry about this, and I might not be so willing to go scorched earth if either of those weren't true. Just wanted to explain where the world is at and why people should expect to see further incivility about this. |
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | lkbm 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| No one cares if the Pentagon refuses to do business with Anthropic. But Hegseth has declared that effective immediately, no one else working with the DoD can either--which includes the companies hosting Anthropics models (Amazon, Microsoft, and Alphabet). So it's six months to phase out use of Anthropic at the DoD, but the people hosting the models have to stop "immediately". Which miiight impact the amount of inference the DoD would be able to get done in those six months. |
| |
| ▲ | bjh13 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | > So it's six months to phase out use of Anthropic at the DoD, but the people hosting the models have to stop "immediately". > Which miiight impact the amount of inference the DoD would be able to get done in those six months. Which might not be by accident looking at the Truth Social posts which state "Anthropic better get their act together, and be helpful during this phase out period, or I will use the Full Power of the Presidency to make them comply, with major civil and criminal consequences to follow." I would not be surprised to see this being used as an excuse to nationalize Anthropic. | | |
| ▲ | AnimalMuppet 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | To attempt to nationalize Anthropic. I'm sure there would be court cases filed almost immediately, restraining orders, months of cases and then appeals and then appeals of the appeals. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | stackghost 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| >The national industry is supposed to submit to the military's wishes to the extent that they get compensated. According to whom? |
| |
| ▲ | zephen 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | He's reading the room. No, not this room. The one with Hegseth in it. Look at his other comments. He's not wrong. |
|
|
| ▲ | antonvs an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| What's your definition of "patriotism" and why do private companies need to be "patriotic"? How do you reconcile this with the Constitutional guarantees of freedom of speech, freedom of association, and so on? The US isn't Iran, North Korea, or even China, as much as some people, including the US president, seem want to emulate those models. |
|
| ▲ | tiahura 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| [flagged] |
