3 ms·

The part that gets me about anthropic red lines is "of Americans", okay so the rest of the civilized world is up for grabs then? It's okay to destabalize allies

The part that gets me about anthropic red lines is "of Americans", okay so the rest of the civilized world is up for grabs then? It's okay to destabalize allies with sabotaged tests (in machine learning) and data exfiltration outside America? What gets me the most is that they claim that the model should follow the https://www.anthropic.com/constitution https://www.anthropic.com/constitution and they claim that it's embedded into the model. However, system prompts in claude code and cowork re-iterate all of these points and if they're embedded you shouldn't need to do that. Now, if you ask the API version of claude to be a hitler supporter with enough prompt engineering it will become one which directly contradicts what they claim to do, opus 4.7 specifically will be happy to create anti-(insert minority group) propaganda although I haven't had the same success with 4.8 thus far, but I also haven't been motivated enough to push it in that direction yet since I've been more interested in exploting the cyber capabilities of the model. My conclusion from the very start is that Anthropic's strategy are pure optics and considering the fact that there was an outpoor of support for the company I think it has been very successful.

nerdsniper 4mo ago
> The part that gets me about anthropic red lines is "of Americans", okay so the rest of the civilized world is up for grabs then? It's okay to destabalize allies with sabotaged tests (in machine learning) and data exfiltration outside America? Regardless of Anthropic's "moral" position (inasmuch as a corporation can even have morals) against spying on non-Americans, they would have no way to enforce that limitation against the government because non-citizens outside of the USA have no protections from the intrusions of the US government.
- cbolton 4mo ago
  They can include these limitations in a contract which can be enforced like any contract.
  - NewsaHackO 4mo ago
    I don't think they can, at least if they are making an argument for why the Defense Production Act should not apply to them. Their original argument is that they will not help with anything that is unconstitutional, such as the unlawful spying on American citizens, without a warrant.
    - jazzyjackson 4mo ago
      I don’t think Defense Production Act lets the government takeover what you produce, just that if you sell something you have to prioritize selling to the Feds. There is also precedent that code is speech and the government cannot compel speech (this came up during the debacle where FBI wanted a backdoor to unlock iPhones and Apple said no, we’re not building that)
      - nerdsniper 4mo ago
        It’s slightly nuanced, but during COVID-19 the DPA was applied to GM for production of ventilator machines. GM had not yet ever made any ventilator machines, and had only just one week earlier begun laying the groundwork to partner with Ventec Life Systems to look into retooling their automotive electronics factory in Kokomo, IN to produce ventilators. I agree that the Apple case indicates that there’s a lot of uncertainty around this type of issue, at least post 1953 when title II of the DPA expired after Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1952)
    - deleted 4mo ago
      [deleted]
  - nerdsniper 4mo ago
    FISA Section 702 (50 U.S.C. § 1881a) or CLOUD Act could be used to override any contractual terms that US government agencies may have agreed to. Those clauses would be unenforceable / unexecutable. More generally it would be overpowered by the Sovereign Acts Doctrine. The facts aren’t identical to the 2008 Yahoo FISCR case but that case sets the tone for how any clauses like this would just be brushed under the rug.
avadodin 4mo ago
These companies are so good at selling their product's likely incompetence as possibly intentional subversion.
dminik 4mo ago
Yeah, it was funny seeing a bunch of people going like "Anthropic is fighting for privacy" meanwhile I'm like "Uhh, what about the other 8 billion people?" On second thought, it's not funny.
- beng-nl 4mo ago
  As a thought experiment - such shocks (govt pressure to use models for bad purposes and govt excluding access to non-Americans) coming early in the ‘ai revolution’ will wake up the rest of the world sooner that they have to get their act together to stay competitive without relying on USA. Just like with nato.
oefrha 4mo ago
> anthropic red lines Alleged red lines. Could be just talking points for garnering sympathy. Big tech aren’t exactly known for being truthful, especially big tech partnering with esteemed Palantir.
- deleted 4mo ago
  [deleted]
throwaw12 4mo ago
> The part that gets me about anthropic red lines is "of Americans", okay so the rest of the civilized world is up for grabs then? And this is coming from a CEO who constantly claims moral superiority and advances the idea that China is bad

nerdsniper 4mo ago

> The part that gets me about anthropic red lines is "of Americans", okay so the rest of the civilized world is up for grabs then? It's okay to destabalize allies with sabotaged tests (in machine learning) and data exfiltration outside America? Regardless of Anthropic's "moral" position (inasmuch as a corporation can even have morals) against spying on non-Americans, they would have no way to enforce that limitation against the government because non-citizens outside of the USA have no protections from the intrusions of the US government.

cbolton 4mo ago
They can include these limitations in a contract which can be enforced like any contract.
- NewsaHackO 4mo ago
  I don't think they can, at least if they are making an argument for why the Defense Production Act should not apply to them. Their original argument is that they will not help with anything that is unconstitutional, such as the unlawful spying on American citizens, without a warrant.
  - jazzyjackson 4mo ago
    I don’t think Defense Production Act lets the government takeover what you produce, just that if you sell something you have to prioritize selling to the Feds. There is also precedent that code is speech and the government cannot compel speech (this came up during the debacle where FBI wanted a backdoor to unlock iPhones and Apple said no, we’re not building that)
    - nerdsniper 4mo ago
      It’s slightly nuanced, but during COVID-19 the DPA was applied to GM for production of ventilator machines. GM had not yet ever made any ventilator machines, and had only just one week earlier begun laying the groundwork to partner with Ventec Life Systems to look into retooling their automotive electronics factory in Kokomo, IN to produce ventilators. I agree that the Apple case indicates that there’s a lot of uncertainty around this type of issue, at least post 1953 when title II of the DPA expired after Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1952)
  - deleted 4mo ago
    [deleted]
- nerdsniper 4mo ago
  FISA Section 702 (50 U.S.C. § 1881a) or CLOUD Act could be used to override any contractual terms that US government agencies may have agreed to. Those clauses would be unenforceable / unexecutable. More generally it would be overpowered by the Sovereign Acts Doctrine. The facts aren’t identical to the 2008 Yahoo FISCR case but that case sets the tone for how any clauses like this would just be brushed under the rug.

avadodin 4mo ago

These companies are so good at selling their product's likely incompetence as possibly intentional subversion.

dminik 4mo ago

Yeah, it was funny seeing a bunch of people going like "Anthropic is fighting for privacy" meanwhile I'm like "Uhh, what about the other 8 billion people?" On second thought, it's not funny.

beng-nl 4mo ago
As a thought experiment - such shocks (govt pressure to use models for bad purposes and govt excluding access to non-Americans) coming early in the ‘ai revolution’ will wake up the rest of the world sooner that they have to get their act together to stay competitive without relying on USA. Just like with nato.

oefrha 4mo ago

> anthropic red lines Alleged red lines. Could be just talking points for garnering sympathy. Big tech aren’t exactly known for being truthful, especially big tech partnering with esteemed Palantir.

deleted 4mo ago
[deleted]

throwaw12 4mo ago

> The part that gets me about anthropic red lines is "of Americans", okay so the rest of the civilized world is up for grabs then? And this is coming from a CEO who constantly claims moral superiority and advances the idea that China is bad