11 comments

[ 3.4 ms ] story [ 29.5 ms ] thread
Anthropic signed a $200 million contract with the world’s largest military and hadn’t considered if it would be used for military operations? When an article reads like fiction, I can’t help but assume there’s an entirely different political disagreement happening behind closed doors.
Don't get distracted. This technology is going to be used to kill people.
It's been bad since 2015. All the A.I. companies are in on it now.
"Anthropic had built its brand around promoting AI safety, emphasizing red lines it said it wouldn’t cross. Its usage guidelines contain strict limitations that prohibit Claude from facilitating violence, developing or designing weapons, or conducting mass surveillance."

I can't say that I fully trust this at face value, but I will say, at least at face value, that this commitment to non-violence is something I wish more tech companies in history had made. Whether it's an authentic commitment or just PR remains to be fully seen.

Just ask at high level.

The military has a problem on limiting its ability to do mass surveillance of the US public. Why? Why would it have a problem with that limitation?

The issues in the contract under dispute are things we shouldn't want the military doing.

it's a good sign? We are having these debates, and it's aired in public?