6 ms·
OpenAI is playing games. When Anthropic says they have red lines, they mean "We refuse to let you use our models for these ends, even if it means losing nearly
by AlexVranas 7mo ago
OpenAI is playing games.
When Anthropic says they have red lines, they mean "We refuse to let you use our models for these ends, even if it means losing nearly a billion dollars in business."
When OpenAI says they have red lines, they mean "We are going to let the DoD do whatever the hell they want, but we will shake our fist at them while they do it."
That's why they got the contract. The DoD was clear about what they wanted, and OpenAI wasn't going to get anywhere without agreeing to that. They're about as transparent as Mac from It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia when he's telling everyone he's playing both sides.
- gchamonlive 7mo ago[flagged]
- enlightens 7mo agoOnly Congress can change the name of a federal department, so the Department of Defense is still properly called that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_14347 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_14347
- hdgvhicv 7mo agoOnly Congress can declare war but here we are with the department of war bombing a foreign country and capturing and assassinating foreign leaders.
- leereeves 7mo agoThat policy changed a long time ago. The last declaration of war was June 4, 1942. After Vietnam, Congress passed the War Powers Resolution to limit the ability of Presidents to conduct military action without Congressional approval, but it still allows military action for up to 60 days. Every President since then has used that power. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Powers_Resolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Powers_Resolution
- gchamonlive 7mo agoSo the president can wage war without the Congress, but it can't officially rename the department that supports these wars autocratically. That's interesting.
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- catlover76 7mo ago[dead]
- nashashmi 7mo agoIraq war was the last declared war. Afghanistan war was also declared.
- mikkupikku 7mo agoIncorrect. The only times America has formally declared war were the War of 1812, the Mexican-American War, the Spanish-American War, World War I, and World War II. In the case of the Barbary Wars, Vietnam War, the Iraq War and War on Terror / Afghanistan War, etc... congress approved military engagement but DID NOT issue a formal Declaration of War.
- microtonal 7mo agoYou mean that they were special military operations? j/k Interesting though, I never knew this.
- happymellon 7mo agoEven your link doesn't say what you imply. > It provides that the president can send the U.S. Armed Forces into action abroad only by Congress's "statutory authorization", or in case of "a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces". There was not at attack on the United States.
- vibeprofessor 7mo ago[dead]
- torginus 7mo ago'Power is the perception of power'
- almosthere 7mo agoThat part isn't sited. It is likely not true.
- enlightens 7mo agoThe EO itself agrees with this and says that the War title is secondary. It explicitly doesn’t truly rename the department.
- gchamonlive 7mo agoHowever if you go to https://www.usa.gov/agencies/u-s-department-of-defense https://www.usa.gov/agencies/u-s-department-of-defense and click in the link for the https://www.defense.gov/ https://www.defense.gov/ you get redirected to https://www.war.gov/ https://www.war.gov/ So I think a bit of confusion on my part is justified.
- DowsingSpoon 7mo agoThe Department of Defense was established by the National Security Act of 1947. If the Congress wanted to change the name then they would pass another law to do so. An executive order is not law.
- catchcatchcatch 7mo ago[dead]
- throw10920 7mo agoEven though the the DoD was created via an act of Congress, as POTUS is the head of the Executive Branch and the CiC of the armed forces, could you make an argument that a name change can be done by executive order? (setting aside whether or not the new proposed name is stupid)
- almosthere 7mo agoAnd when it was created it was DOW.
- ikidd 7mo agoGulf of Mexico.
- GaryBluto 7mo ago[flagged]
- wqaatwt 7mo agoBy using the actual legal and official name of the department (which Trump didn’t and couldn’t change)?
- ruszki 7mo agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Defense https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_De... Stoping and questioning why somebody uses DoD or DoW is way more telling than using any of those. Especially that both are perfectly fine, even officially. A square was renamed in my home city about 20 years ago. We still use the original one usually, even teens know that name. I use a form of the original name of our main stadium which was renamed almost 30 years ago. Heck, some people use names of streets which are not official for almost 40 years now. Btw, the same with departments of the government. Nobody follows how they called at the moment, because nobody really cares. That’s the strange when somebody cares.
- Finbel 7mo agoOr it could have just been a genuine question. I'm not American and I've seen DoW used in newspapers and thought the name change was official. Personally I've thought it a more apt and honest name for what they do. But the backlash in the commments here show how ideologically charged the question seem to be.
- gchamonlive 7mo agoI wasn't aware of how ideologically charged the question was. I'm also not American, but I'm glad I made the question. It's a clear sign for us not Americans to just leave them be.
- komali2 7mo ago> It's a clear sign for us not Americans to just leave them be. Depending on where you live in the world that might be quite hard to do soon.
- hellzbellz123 7mo agobecause most americans do not want war, at least id hope, so calling it that seems pretty short sited (maybe until you continually do that 'war' thing), if you want the citizens to look positively on your spending it should probably be for defense not war, again, at least i should hope. im just a dumb "lib" whatever that means
- Finbel 7mo agoOn the other hand calling it "Department of Defense" seems quite whitewashing of what it actually does.
- happymellon 7mo agoIt spends the defence budget...
- westmeal 7mo agoWhich is used primarily for offense anyway
- Braxton1980 7mo agoI'm pretty sure the amount the money spent on offensive actions is significantly less than the defense
- westmeal 7mo agoWhen was America last invaded by a foreign adversary?
- JumpCrisscross 7mo agoThis resembles anti-vax logic. We haven’t been invaded because our military maintains a strong deterrence and strategic depth.
- s-y 7mo agolaw of triviality on full display
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- croes 7mo agoBecause using DoW is woke when the legal name is DoD. Pretty ironic given their anti-woke agenda
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- OJFord 7mo agoPerhaps because the latter sounds hilariously childish?
- nashashmi 7mo agoActually that was the original name. And it was a more honest name.
- OJFord 7mo agoIt's always been the MoD in the UK afaik, but there was the War Office I suppose.
- SanjayMehta 7mo agoIt was the War Office from 1857 to the mid 60s.
- OJFord 7mo agoDifferent entities, but yes I said 'there was the War Office'.
- mrguyorama 7mo agoWhat is currently considered the DoD was built after WW2 as the "National Military Establishment" by the "National Security Act of 1947" which restructured and reformed significant war and military assets under the "Secretary of Defense" and the NME was very quickly renamed the "Department of Defense". The "Department of War" during WW2 was in control of the Army, and was separate from the Department of the Navy and eventual Department of the Air Force (spun off from the Army) and was headed by the "Secretary of War". Changing the name to "Defense" was an intentional act by a President and government who wanted to reduce the power of the Military Industrial Complex and reduce the "War" focus of a subset of the government, and force the different departments to work together and share toys. The reorganization was desired for many reasons but Truman made lots of talk about how this was about the national defense and made gestures to the Pearl Harbor attack as something relevant. Different departments failing to work together was a huge problem during WW2, and other wars. Putting them all under one single cabinet position, the Secretary of Defense, was a significant point. This vocab was used during the war, about the reorganization being about the defense of the nation. Similarly, NATO is a defense only pact, in very clear terms. There was tons of debate in the US government at the time as to whether we had viable intelligence of the Japanese attack at Pearl Harbor ahead of time and it wasn't properly utilized or disseminated. In fact, there were many such instances in the Pacific Theater early on, where poor intelligence handling resulted in worse battle outcomes. The point of the Department of Defense is to Defend America, and they do that by being in control of our Military. Letting our defense assets bully the world is the Utter Failure of the American voting public over the past 100 years.
- rapnie 7mo agoDOW was already taken, and that is the one to watch when it all comes crashing down?
- rmm78 7mo ago>Why DoD and not DoW? Reddit/Bluesky brigade is in full force here, that's why
- bambax 7mo ago> but we will shake our fist at them while they do it Not even that. They are not shaking anything except their booty.
- germandiago 7mo agoI am going to stop using ChatGPT immediately.
- Vvector 7mo agoDelete your account. I did. https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenAI/comments/1rh30rw/great_day_to_delete_account/ https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenAI/comments/1rh30rw/great_day_t...
- replwoacause 7mo agoDeleting my account today once I import my data to Claude
- kenperkins 7mo agoI'm also waiting on my ChatGPT data export. I started it last night and I'm still waiting. I would say there's huge opportunity here for Claude to offer direct import tooling.
- aeon_ai 7mo agoLiterally a feature being advertised as of today.
- foobarian 7mo agoNo no no use it more, make sure to use up as much tokens as possible. They do inference at a loss
- TomGarden 7mo agoThis makes no sense, their value in the marketplace is in usage and inflated promise, not actual revenues
- mystraline 7mo agoIve got a 'Claw interfacing with OpenAI and generating garbage questions and responses. I have an 8k context on mine. Deletion with OpenAI isnt really deletion. So I'll waste their resources AND train on low quality slop on my side. My work degrades theirs.
- docmars 7mo agoPersonally I think OpenAI is intending to infiltrate their political enemy's stronghold and look for ways to leak data to "get Trump" as per usual. They'll say "oops" and then we'll spend the next few years listening to pointless Congressional hearings.
- ghm2199 7mo agoIsn't it simpler to say that anthropic adopted a values based use approach and openai adopted a legal one? Or In other words you can get to decide two ways to use a lucrative property: 1. designate it private and draft usage of how you allow to use it, per your value system(as long as values don't violate any laws) 2. In face of competition, give up some values and agree to a legal definition of use that favors you.
- pbhjpbhj 7mo agoWhat does 'a legal approach' mean where there is no rule of law? USA just bombed another country without having a domestic legal basis for that. Can't imagined they're holding back on AI use that is illegal -- even textbook-clear warcrimes (like blowing up shipwrecked people) does not give Hegseth and Trump pause. That goes for domestic actions too, happy to arm a paramilitary and set them loose against citizens who are not politically aligned with Trump... the Republican Senate barely even blinks. Hard to imagine they'd care about AI use in mass surveillance, nor AI use in automated anti-personnel weapons. The Senate will be, 'Oh no they unlawfully killed USA citizens, again... Welp, let me check my insider trading gains... yh, seems fine'.
- trjordan 7mo ago"Red lines" does not mean some philosophical line they will not cross. "Redlines" are edits to a contract, sent by lawyers to the other party they're negotiating with. They show up in Word's Track Changes mode as red strikethrough for deleted content. They are negotiating the specifics of a contract, and Anthropic's contract was overly limiting to the DoD, whereas OpenAI's was not.
- mikeryan 7mo agoThat’s not how the term is being used here. In this case “red lines” as a term is being used as “lines than can not be crossed” Anthropic wanted guardrails on how their tech was used. DOD was saying that wasn’t acceptable.
- p0w3n3d 7mo agos/DoD/DoW/g
- shaftway 7mo agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_14347 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_14347 > Among U.S. federal agencies, the order authorized the official use of the secondary title "Department of War" for the United States Department of Defense. The department now refers to itself as the "Department of War" for non-statutory purposes, but is still technically named the Department of Defense, as only an act of Congress can formally change the name of a federal department.