Hegseth to Anthropic: Nice company you got there…

[jon-nyc]

[Horace]

OpenAI goes where Anthropic dared not to:

Note that OpenAI's spin of the agreement makes it sound identical to what Anthropic demanded and the DoD refused. I wonder what the practical differences are.

[Axtremus]

[Horace]

@Axtremus my post contained the crucial insight that openAI’s agreement is described as identical to what Anthropic offered. Therefore my contribution is objectively superior to yours.

[Mik]

My take? It is a discussion best approached quietly, not with the usual public belligerence of this administration. It looks petulant whether they are right or wrong and Anthropic looks like good citizens. The company framed this beautifully. Sometimes Trump et al just don't seem to know what fights are not wise to pick.

[jon-nyc]

Seems to me the important part happened after that. The remedy if they don’t give you what you want is to find a different vendor. Not crush what very well may be the leading AI company in the country.

[Mik]

Yeah, that too. If I were a CEO it would not make me eager to deal with this administration, preferring to see who is next. But that kind of ties in with what fight to pick.

[jon-nyc]

What they were specifically asking for is starting to leak out.

[89th]

Does Anthropic or any gen AI company these days prevent the use of AI on "unclassified commercial data"? By that definition, that data is already available (probably for purchase) by any company or prompt jockey. Unless you think it's a coincidence that you searched for Dyson vacuums or walked by a Dyson vacuum store and start seeing ads for them.

[Horace]

This just in from the Department of Obvious Reality:

OpenAI CEO says company can't tell Pentagon how to use its AI tech

https://seekingalpha.com/news/4560857-openai-ceo-says-company-cant-tell-pentagon-how-to-use-its-ai-tech?share_source=shared_news?source=reddit

[jon-nyc]

The Department of Obvious Reality observes contract law. And yes, indeed, a technology company can explicitly exclude certain uses of its technology. (In fact there was an example of this in the news just last week).

The remedy for a customer is to switch vendors. Perhaps even a law suit if they think a contract was violated. It ends there. It does not include using government power to punish the company let alone threaten its viability.

[Horace]

@jon-nyc said in Hegseth to Anthropic: Nice company you got there…:

The Department of Obvious Reality observes contract law. And yes, indeed, a technology company can explicitly exclude certain uses of its technology. (In fact there was an example of this in the news just last week).

Tantalizing. But since you didn't cite the example, I assume it's not a very good analogy to a defense contractor trying to limit what the DoD can do, within the law.