5 ms·
This has much broader implications for the US economy and rule of law in the US. If government procurement rules intended for national security risks can be ab
by grey-area 8mo ago
This has much broader implications for the US economy and rule of law in the US.
If government procurement rules intended for national security risks can be abused as a way to punish Anthropic for perceived lack of loyalty, why not any other company that displeases the administration like Apple or Amazon?
This marks an important turning point for the US.
- busko 8mo agoYep, where does your trust lay now? It's been a minute of pretending it'll be okay.
- adventured 8mo agoNothing has changed in decades regarding this. People just like to pretend something new is happening, because they're extremely desperate to proclaim a fundamental turning / ending of the US (which is why every single event brings out those claims: this time is different! America will never recover from this! etc). US tech companies were previously forced into compliance with PRISM or threatened with destruction (see: escalating fines to infinity against Yahoo, forcing their eventual compliance). You know what's new? This administration is doing out in the open what used to go on quietly.
- lostlogin 8mo ago> Nothing has changed > You know what's new? This administration is doing out in the open what used to go on quietly. So this administration has got bold and the behaviour has become overt.
- matheusmoreira 8mo agoThe US has already ended. It was destroyed in 9/11/2001. America is a shadow of its former self.
- queenkjuul 8mo agoBin laden really did win
- alopha 8mo agoTrump was threatening Netflix for having a democrat on the board last week. They seized 10% of Intel. They forced Nvidia to tithe 25% of China revenue into a slush fund. The FCC has been used to censor comedy. The ship has sailed and the only consequence has been hand-wringing.
- pjc50 8mo agoBut the Dow is over 50,000! That is, the money doesn't care so long as it's still profitable. When the recession comes a Democrat will be allowed back in to fix things. See Liz Truss.
- blfr 8mo agoNo one after Liz Truss fixed anything in Britain.
- collabs 8mo agoI think the fix was reversing the idiotic tax cuts that Liz Truss promised. It doesn't fix every single problem ever for England but nothing ever does. I think the solution is also obvious for the United States — higher taxes and lower government spending. We need to do both. However, you can't get elected if you promise both those things.
- kkotak 8mo agoYes and it stands for the Department of War now.
- khalic 8mo agoYeah the passivity of the US population will be remembered for generations. Of course it's the people talking about freedom the most that do the least, as usual, big mouths are antithetical to actions.
- pif 8mo agoUtter idiocy at election day is not passivity. History will put Trumpers and Confederate at the same level of despicability.
- pineaux 8mo agoIts called corporatism and is a part of classical fascism.
- throawayonthe 8mo ago*capitalism ftfy
- goku12 8mo agoI don't see a good reason to downvote you, though that's a pattern here these days. But I do have a question about your statement. This move certainly has the hallmarks of fascism. But how is it corporatism when it's the elected government that's trying to punish a corporation? Granted that this regime is deep in the pockets of the corporations and billionaires. But it looks like they would have spared Anthropic if they capitulated to the regime's demands and bent their back over. This seems more like retribution for refusal of loyalty rather than corporate sabotage.
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- Boxxed 8mo ago> But it looks like they would have spared Anthropic if they capitulated to the regime's demands and bent their back over. Yeah dude, that's the point.
- notahacker 8mo agoCorporatism/corporatocracy is about representative groups from industries being embedded in the state and their interests shaping state policy. The current US administration's relationships with corporations is more seeking to maximise how much bribe money it can extract from them, whilst undermining them with counterproductive policies no matter how big the tax breaks are.
- wavemode 8mo agoThat's the opposite of corporatism. Corporatism would be if the corporations made demands of the government, and the government bent over backwards. The US government has lots of corporatism, but this isn't an example of that.
- bambax 8mo agoThe turning point happened when Trump was reelected. One could argue the turning point happened Jan. 6 2020 and nobody truly cared. The consequence should have been for all insurrectionists and Trump himself to be tried for treason and be imprisoned indefinitely. Yet here we are.
- shevy-java 8mo agoI'd agree - Trump fulfils the criteria of treason. It's interesting to see that nothing happens despite this. Now he started another war to distract from his involvement in the huge Epstein network. Also, by the way, quite interesting to see how many people were involved here; there is no way Ghislaine could solo-organise all of that yet she is the only one in prison. That makes objectively no sense.
- formerly_proven 8mo agoAnother flawed democracy just sentenced their ex-president who attempted a insurrection (and similarly claimed broad presidential powers and immunity) to life in prison. Interesting contrast. e: Americans seem to be surprised to learn that their democracy is indeed classified as a flawed democracy for more than a decade by The Economist due to decades of backsliding (the more rapid regression lately is not yet accounted for, but I wouldn't be surprised if the outcome of the 2026 elections results in a hybrid regime assessment in 2027).
- tim333 8mo agoYou'd have a job arguing it's treason legally. In the US that's "levying War against [the United States], or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort". They were going to do him for conspiracy to defraud the United States and conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, re. the 2020 stuff before he got reelected.
- jmull 8mo ago> The consequence should have been for all insurrectionists and Trump himself to be tried for treason and be imprisoned indefinitely. People have this intuitive sense that there's some kind of authority of truth or justice, an available recourse that we could've and should've used. But that sense is incorrect. What we actually have the political and justice systems that Trump and his adherent have, so far, quite successfully subverted.
- altmanaltman 8mo agoI would argue we're miles away from an important turning point, it's been turning so much since then, its basically a full circle now
- heresie-dabord 8mo ago> much broader implications Setting aside the spectacular metastasis of a lawless kakistocracy that is literally rewriting the facts on record... Anthropic's leadership has wisely attempted to make it clear that its product is not fit for the US DoD's purpose/objective, which is automated killing at scale. It would be (is) grossly, historically negligent to operate weapons with LLMs. Anthropic built systems for a thuggocracy that only understands bribery, blackmail, and force.
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- rayiner 8mo ago[flagged]
- gruez 8mo ago>That’s not their call to make. Inventors of technologies that could be used for war have never had the right to deny access to those technologies to the elected civilian government.[1] >[1] The government can make you go over to southeast Asia and kill people personally. Is this a normative statement? In other words are you simply claiming "the government has men with guns and therefore can force people/companies do whatever they want", or are you claiming that "the government should be able to commandeer civilian resources for whatever it wants"?
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- rayiner 8mo agoIt’s a descriptive statement about the law. But you’re mischaracterizing the normative principle underlying the law. It’s not based on power, but rather the moral duties incumbent on citizens.
- catlover76 8mo ago
- keybored 8mo agoCorporations learn about “first they came for [Apple Inc.] but I am not [Apple Inc.] so I didn’t do anything”.
- rpcorb 8mo ago[deleted]
- hirako2000 8mo agoIt isn't a left wing stance though. It's standing for the constitution. At the cost of going against the illegal state demands. Compliance with the DoD doesn't remove big tech's complicity.
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- c54 8mo agoYour language suggests you’re an ideological supporter of trump but I’m curious: What exactly is being imposed by anthropic? This is from the anthropic letter: > We held to our exceptions for two reasons. First, we do not believe that today’s frontier AI models are reliable enough to be used in fully autonomous weapons. Allowing current models to be used in this way would endanger America’s warfighters and civilians. Second, we believe that mass domestic surveillance of Americans constitutes a violation of fundamental rights. Do you see these views as “left wing”? Or what do you disagree with here?
- miki123211 8mo agoThe same is true about Meta and US antitrust law, or the GDPR and DMA in Europe. Governments should not be permitted to introduce regulations against companies of this kind if the regulations can be enforced selectively and with regulator discretion, as the GDPR and antitrust definitely are. The free-speech implications are staggering.
- iso1631 8mo agoNot really a turning point, the US has been turning for months, ever since the felatio of inauguration. This is just another rung on the ladder
- rambojohnson 8mo agooutside of just the tech sector, this country has already crossed MANY irreversible turning points. also, good luck with your midterm elections. we have started war with Iran. cheers from Barcelona from this American refugee.
- coldtea 8mo agoRather it's business as usual.
- herval 8mo agothis entire administration has been a constant stream of "important turning point for the US" moments
- ericmay 8mo agoI think most, perhaps all of those "important turning points" aren't really important turning points but just business as usual.
- FartyMcFarter 8mo agoIs threatening an ally business as usual? Tell me about all the times that recent presidents threatened a NATO ally...
- ericmay 8mo agoThings change. Allies just used to be threatened in private. Even today, the UK, Canada, and others are supporting the US and Israel in taking down the regime. I’m not suggesting things haven’t or can’t change, but I am suggesting we haven’t seen any pivotal turning points, at least not yet.
- queenkjuul 8mo agoWe have, they were just a long time ago, and people are only just now noticing because Obama and Biden were relatively restrained and Trump I was simply incompetent. But all the things that allow Trump to do that he's doing happened a long time ago
- TOMDM 8mo agoThen you know and understand nothing.
- queenkjuul 8mo agoI get where you're coming from. Every US administration has been corrupt, flaunted the constitution, started illegal wars (at least in the last 100 years or so) It does kind of drive me nuts that people don't remember Bush very well, and give Obama and Biden passes on their own crimes. That said, i do honestly believe that Trump has taken the level of corruption and abject cruelty to a new level. But this was inevitable; both parties have spent 50 years building this reality. I won't be surprised when the next Democrat also deports millions and starts illegal wars.
- jmyeet 8mo agoThis isn’t new. Maybe some people are just now realizing it. Take the stated tool for this action, the Defense Production Act ("DPA") [1]. It was passed in 1950. What does it cover? Well, lots of things. The DPA has been invoked many times over 76 years. Notably in 1980 it was expanded to include "energy", I guess in response to the 1970s OPEC Oil Crisis. Remember during he pandemic when gas prices skyrocketed? As an aside, that was Trump's fault. But given that "energy" is a "material good" under the DPA, the government could've invoked it to tackle high energy prices and didn't. So, the government is willing to invoke the DPA to protect corporate and wealthy interests, which now includes military applications of AI for imperialist purposes, but never for you, the average citizen. IT's weird how that keeps consistently happening. The US government has consistently acted to further the interests of US corporations and the ultra-wealthy. You probably just haven't been paying attention until now. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_Production_Act_of_1950 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_Production_Act_of_1950
- frogperson 8mo agoIm sorry to say the turning point has well passed. The US is a facist country with leaders who will flaunt the rule of law. Please memorize the 14 points of fascism, you will see examples of this multiple times a day. Its ecerywhere. https://ratical.org/ratville/CAH/fasci14chars.html https://ratical.org/ratville/CAH/fasci14chars.html
- throawayonthe 8mo agoi genuinely do not understand why anyone is acting like this is something new; has this not been the status quo since forever? futhermore this is kind of a naive framing painting the state as somehow separate from majority of the capital...
- cmorgan31 8mo agoAre you claiming it has been status quo for the US government to king make companies through the usage of the defense protection act when one entity refuses to remove safeguards? Do you have any examples or is this just the worldview that aligns with your own?
- gentoo 8mo agoSure, the state has always had theoretical power to do this, but when was the last time something remotely like this actually happened?
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- grey-area 8mo agoNo, this is far from the status quo for US government, it is not ordinary corruption, nor is it going to stop here. Trump and associates have used the machinery of state to attack their enemies, attacked and belittled the judiciary while trying to subvert it, and demanded fealty from large businesses under threat of destroying them. It is unprecedented, reckless and a very dangerous moment, unfortunately not just the US has to live with the consequences. If you think it is business as usual you need to do some reading of history, specifically a century ago in Germany.
- ricksunny 8mo agoturning point? The episode is literally playing out the AEC's (read: war-footed government) 1954 Oppenheimer security-clearance hearing in real-time for a fresh modern-day audience.
- codyb 8mo agoWhat? Lol, they've been doing that the entire time. They're very open about the playbook lol. Bow down, or get harassed, sued, investigated, fined, etc.
- chazftw 8mo agoActually it doesn’t. Always been that way, the new generation hasn’t studied history as they should.
- queenkjuul 8mo agoNeither did the last one
- atoav 8mo agoWell as I said in 2026 before Trump got elected the firdt time: Trump will ultimately lead to fascism. And fascism famously tries to align its industries with the state. Now I made that judgement in my 2016 based on what I have read about the man and his character. I grew up in an Austrian province that was during my youth lead by back then one of the first European new-right politicians (Jörg Haider). So let's say I knew the type and the dynamics that would emerge around figures like this including the rich people who think they can control him and so on. Trump is a textbook narcissist and as such of course he is going to treat the companies like a narcissist treats any person. The competition you will get is one of who can act the most submissive, who can bribe him the best. Needless to say this is a style of governance that is economically unsustainable. But anybody with a decent idea of world history could have seen this from miles away.