Anthropic dictating what our military can and can't do is also authoritarian behavior. The military is responsible to the US people, where Anthropic isn't. Giving power to a company instead of the people is wrong.

▲

knightscoop 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The word you are searching for is not authoritarian, but liberty.

▲

anigbrowl 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Is Anthropic required to sell to the government even if doesn't want to, and is willing to give up its government contracts rather than change its terms of use?

▲

charcircuit 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Anthropic is free to not sell to the government.

	▲	buttercraft 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		That is apparently false given this situation

▲

CamperBob2 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

So what I'm hearing is, having trampled every other amendment in the Bill of Rights, the Trump administration is now turning its sights to the Third.

▲

charcircuit 4 hours ago | parent [-]

>No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

We are not talking about soldiers living in Anthropic's offices. We are talking about an office employee being able to generate a PowerPoint about autonomous weapon systems.

	▲	CamperBob2 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Addressed elsewhere in the thread. I could easily envision a Supreme Court decision based on reasoning such as, "Clearly the intent of the framers was that American citizens should not be forced to provide goods or services to the military against their will." Dumber stretches of logic have certainly emerged from SCOTUS. If Wickard v. Filburn makes sense to them, so could this. Maybe not from the present bench, but perhaps from a hypothetically less-partisan one.