I hate this so much. The nsa’s spying on everyone in 2010 was “legal” and I can only imagine how much worse it is now with AI to follow your digital footprint around everywhere. Too bad we don’t have any more whistleblowers like Snowden

* spawn 8 investigative agents

When shit hits the fan they are going to blame AI, but then not even use hand sanitizer. They will 100% be using OAI as a scapegoat, although I'd like to see the OAI goat stay and someone else run into the woods.

All Lawful Use is a tautology with fascists because they cannot break laws by definition.

More like they will feed machine bullshit like WMDs exist in Fiji. My gut says so. My mom always believes me. Machine will call it out. Then they want overide. Machine will log it. Then they want an erase log button etc. Institutions and rules didnt fall from the sky. It evolved to damp the damage caused by such behavior.

Here's a simple ubsubscribe guide

https://usa.gov/renounce-lose-citizenship

By voting.

The source for the poisoned apple story is Oppenheimer himself, and otherwise uncorroborated to be clear. He spent his life clearly racked by feelings of inadequacy, guilt and self-doubt.

When combined with a somewhat paradoxical large ego and occasionally fanciful reshaping of his own life story or exaggeration, it's entirely plausible (if not likely) that this was in reality a brief intrusive thought or a partially realized fantasy blown up into a catchy anecdote that better fit his self-image of being unable to control his typically human qualities of anger and envy.

If it was Sam Altman, we'd have heard the story from the guy he tried to poison, who instead of filing a police report thought it showed Sam was a real go-getter and offered him his first job on the spot as VP at the company he founded (later forced out by Sam replacing him as CEO, but still considers him a friend with no hard feelings).

The idea isn't that Oppenheimer was a saint, but that the government he served well and faithfully -- at the expense of his soul, some would argue -- turned on him viciously as soon as he dared to question their agenda.

As you suggest, it is easy to imagine Altman in the same hot seat. Never mind his sexual orientation, which the Republican theocrats will eventually use against him as surely as the knives came out for Ernst Röhm.

> Choosing Grok would be bad for the US

They chose Grok and OpenAI. The story was drowned out by the Anthropic controversy, but an xAI deal was signed the same week.

The mistake here is thinking they can take on Power without really sitting in any officual position of Power.

Wikileaks and Assange got popular too. What happened to them?

The State Dept and CIA do exactly what Assange did. They pick and choose who to target with leaks. They get away with it (mostly even when exposed) because they officially are in power. Assange was not in power. If you take a moral position do it when you have real power.

> Choosing OpenAI does not harm the republic

if we consider AIs as "force multipliers" as we do with coding agents, it's easy to see how any AI company can harm the republic if the government they are serving is unethical and amoral.

Lyft was briefly number one ahead of Uber, too

There is also:

3. Talent migration to Anthropic. No serious researcher working towards AGI will want it to be in the hands of OpenAI anymore. They are all asking themselves: "do I trust Sam or Dario more with AGI/ASI?" and are finding the former lacking.

It is already telling that Anthropic's models outperform OAI's with half the headcount and a fraction of the funding.

They still need a lot of money and what their VC’s think is going to be more important than what Amedei does. Nothing more profitable than war and government.

App Store rankings are meaningless, I have Claude, ChatGPT and Gemini all in top five, with a electronic mail app being 1 and a postal tracking service app (for a very small provider) being 3.

I got it from Tamar Gendlers philosophy and human nature course on open yale courses. She says it was a popular folk story passed down orally much before it was written in a book. Plato used it because people grew up hearing the story.

The story is asking whats the source of morality? Who decides where the lines are? And its not scientists. Science produces the Ring.

I have noticed this too, despite the close benchmark results Claude just works better. It knows when to push back, it has an "agency"... there is something there that I don't see with Gemini or OpenAI's best paid models.

AI doesn't add anything to the ability to do mass surveillance. That genie was already out of the bottle from clouds and big data systems. At best AI might take on some of the gruntwork for drawing conclusions from profiles but it's doing it's usual thing of being a powerful interface built on top of other systems.

I have no idea what exactly Anthropic was offering the DoD, but if there were a LLM product, possible that the existing guardrails prevented the model from executing on the DoD vision.

"Find all of the terrorists in this photo", "Which targets should I bomb first?"

Even if the DoD wanted to ignore the legal terms, the model itself would not cooperate. DoD required a specially trained product without limitations.

There's a reason it's unpopular.

If your company makes an herbicide that happens to be very good at killing off anyone who drinks it at a high concentration in their water supply, you're saying that there should be no way for your company to resist being used for mass murder (including unavoidable collateral damage)?

Also, the core mission of the military is not "killing its adversaries through any means necessary". It is to defend state interests. Some people have a belief that mass killing is the best mechanism for accomplishing that. I do not agree with, nor do I want to associate with, those people. They are morally and objectively wrong. Yes, sometimes killing people is the most effective -- or more likely, the quickest -- way. In practice, it doesn't work very well. The threat of violence is much more powerful than actually committing violence. If you have to resort to the latter, you've usually screwed up and lost the chance to achieve the optimal outcome. It is true that having no restrictions whatsoever on your ability to commit violence is going to be more intimidating, but it also means that you have to maintain that threat constantly for everyone, because nobody has any other reason to give you what you want.

The actual military is not evil. Your conception of it is.

With the way you've phrased it the government could nuke the entire world; all of the adversaries would be dead along with literally everyone else. I don't really see why it's an issue if a company doesn't want to sell them the tools to do that.

If I start a small business that sells Apples and the US government comes to me and says "we want to buy your apples and fire them at high speed to" these are now your words "kill adversaries through any means necessary."

If I say, no, then am I stopping the military?

I feel like it is reasonable that I can say "no, I don't want to sell you my apples."

I cannot for the life of me figure out why that means I am stopping the military from killing people. The US Military will definitely still be able to kill people for centuries. I'm just saying I don't want to participate in it.

That's not their mission, in any country, ever.

The problem here is that this department claims its adversaries are Americans. Do you think antropic should aid in the killing of Americans?

Any company is free to choose its business partners and set terms to them. "Don't like our terms, don't partner with us"

If government can force any private company to work specially for government then US is no better than PRC

Yes, Musk is guilty of treason for exactly that reason. He directly sabotaged a major US military operation in Ukraine.

However, the military is bound by US and international law. It's clear they're not going to obey either of those with respect to this contract.

On top of that, Anthropic has correctly pointed out that the use cases Trump was pushing for are well beyond the current capabilities of any of Anthropic models. Misusing their stuff in the way Trump has been (in violation of the contract) is a war crime, because it has already made major mistakes, targeted civilians, etc.