4 ms·
>>>> willing to designate a US company as essentially a foreign spy agency Can you quote where I said that ?
by IG_Semmelweiss 8mo ago
>>>> willing to designate a US company as essentially a foreign spy agency
Can you quote where I said that ?
- smarf 8mo agocan you quote where they claimed the above was your statement?
- IG_Semmelweiss 8mo agoYou are correct, but I can't change my comment now. I stand corrected
- mcherm 8mo agoYou wrote: > I'm glad Anthropic is getting a taste of their own medicine. I took that to mean that you support the Pentagon's threat which essentially IS to label Anthropic as a national security threat, simply because they wouldn't give the Pentagon the right to use Anthropic's AI to operate weapons or spy on American citizens.
- IG_Semmelweiss 8mo agoBig fish tries to use their might to kill off small fish . Anthropic uses big $$ it to become big fish in the AI pond. Anthropic just found there are bigger fish in their pond. I'm glad Anthropic have been reminded of this. THat doesn't mean I endorse the US govt using law to make companies a "national security threat" , although its an extremelt easy path from: monopolistic to -> active "national security threat". Govt can, and in fact, has a mandate to, go after businesses when those businesses threaten a functioning market. Threatening is certainly part of that arsenal. That's what anticompetitive rules are all about.
- vonneumannstan 8mo agoYou are deliberately or accidentally confusing a lot of things here. This is not some anti-monopoly maneuver by the... DEPARTMENT OF WAR.