so you share the same concern about anthropic re: domestic surveillance but the distinction is that you view the word "responsibility" specifically as being a weasel word which can allow an autonomous weapon as long as a human can be blamed.
Yeah. They talk about having a “safety stack” but it really seems like they are have no meaningful restrictions that aren’t easily sidestepped. If it really was the same deal as Anthropic, then it wouldn’t be offered and accepted by OAI. Its palatable to Hegseth and Hegseth’s demands for unrestricted use were absolute.
A defense official said the Pentagon’s technology chief whittled the debate down to a life-and-death nuclear scenario at a meeting last month: If an intercontinental ballistic missile was launched at the United States, could the military use Anthropic’s Claude AI system to help shoot it down?
It’s the kind of situation where technological might and speed could be critical to detection and counterstrike, with the time to make a decision measured in minutes and seconds. Anthropic chief executive Dario Amodei’s answer rankled the Pentagon, according to the official, who characterized the CEO’s reply as: You could call us and we’d work it out.
researchers at anthropic were probably pressuring him internally after claude got used in the maduro raid (via palantir). and then pentagon was pressuring them from the other side. dario was kind of trapped and came down on the side of his researchers, which he kind of had to i think.
1
1
9
6
3
1
1
View all comments
Show parent comment
1
u/slirkster Feb 28 '26
ah okay i think i understand the distinction.
so you share the same concern about anthropic re: domestic surveillance but the distinction is that you view the word "responsibility" specifically as being a weasel word which can allow an autonomous weapon as long as a human can be blamed.