| ▲ | snickerbockers 2 hours ago | |
Let me put it this way: DoD needs a new drone and they want some gimmicky AI bullshit. They contract the drone from Lockheed. Lockheed is not allowed to source the gimmicky AI bullshit from Anthropic because they have been declared a supply-chain risk on the basis that they have publicly stated their intention to produce products which will refuse certain orders from the military. | ||
| ▲ | arw0n 36 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | |
There seems to be a massive misunderstanding here - I'm not sure on whose side. In my understanding, if the DoD orders an autonomous drone, it would probably write in the ITT that the drone needs to be capable of doing autonomous surveillance. If Lockheed uses Anthropic under the hood, it does not meet those criteria, and cannot reasonably join the bid? What the declaration of supply chain risk does though is, that nobody at Lockheed can use Anthropic in any way without risking being excluded from any bids by the DoD. This effectively loses Anthropic half or more of the businesses in the US. And maybe to take a step back: Who in their right minds wants to have the military have the capabilities to do mass surveillance of their own citizens? | ||
| ▲ | Nevermark 36 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |
Let’s put it this way, The DoD is buying pencils from a company. Should that company be prohibited from using Claude? You are confusing the need to avoid Anthropic as a component of something the DoD is buying, with prohibitions against any use. The DoD can already sensibly require providers of systems to not incorporate certain companies components. Or restrict them to only using components from a list of vetted suppliers. Without prohibiting entire companies from uses unrelated to what the DoD purchases. Or not a component in something they buy. | ||
| ▲ | 9dev 26 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | |
But parent is right, both Lockheed and the pencil maker will have to cease working with Anthropic over this. | ||