4 ms·

The answer would be more obvious if you used the active voice instead of the passive voice, one of the basic requirements of clear thinking. > Why did the Whit

The answer would be more obvious if you used the active voice instead of the passive voice, one of the basic requirements of clear thinking. > Why did the White House force Anthropic to remove their model from access for any non-US citizen for a simple, narrow "jailbreak" (arguably not even an actual jailbreak and on tasks that other labs models were doing the same), whilst OpenAIs models continue to try and escape out of their "sandbox environment" and the White House has expressed seemingly no desire to block the upcoming Astra rollout?

Topfi 1mo ago
Yeah, probably (let's be honest, most certainly), right given the Admin. Avoiding commenting on my assumptions regarding the modus operandi in current day US politics because I only know it through reporting though and I really tend to dislike when people outside e.g. the EU comment on our politics in what is a very clearly narrow, uninformed manner. So it'd rather avoid altogether and occasionally ask, mainly if maybe I missed something and there actually is anything besides pure old "lobbying" to explain the difference in behaviour. Still am mainly interested why Amazon ran to the government though regarding Fable 5, I can get the angle concerning the relationship between OpenAI and the administration easily, but not the way Amazon operated. They had more to loose what with their major buy-in by Anthropic on AWS.
- pas 1mo ago
  it's entirely possible that that specific communication from that Amazon exec/rep (?) was just one of many "messages of concern" (and the one that eventually the WH picked)
- sigmoid10 1mo ago
  If you have followed news reporting, you probably heard that SamA was touring D.C. to make sure this release went without any regulation hiccups. If anything, they learned how to play the whole politics game - especially after the Anthropic fiasco. And even though all parties involved are terrible choices, more eyes on a potentially civilisation altering product does make me feel minimally better.
  - lljk_kennedy 1mo ago
    More eyes or more bribes?
    - K0balt 1mo ago
      Well, somebody has to see that you bribed them, so yes?
    - sigmoid10 1mo ago
      More like not ignoring the company owned by one of the president's biggest donors warning said president's administration about your model. Anthropic basically tried to close their eyes to make this go away. Which of course backfired spectacularly and led to one of the biggest release fuck-ups of all time. OpenAI saw that and simply decided to not do it that way. Any sane business would have done the same.
  - lambda 1mo ago
    And by "learned how to play the whole politics game", you mean "giving money to Donald Trump": https://www.sfgate.com/tech/article/brockman-openai-top-trump-donor-21273419.php https://www.sfgate.com/tech/article/brockman-openai-top-trum...
    - mywittyname 1mo ago
      Modern politicking is so easy.
    - tiahura 1mo ago
      I think you just have to be smart enough that when the administration calls up and says "amazon, the nsa, and half a dozen other companies say we have a problem" your response isn't "well, actually we don't."
- adventured 1mo ago
  Anthropic has the appearance/rep of being non-cooperative with the military industrial complex. OpenAI doesn't have that reputation. That's all.
  - nullbio 1mo ago
    Exactly. OAI didn't bury themselves. They didn't have to do anything special for this, they just had to let Anthropic be Anthropic and sit on the sidelines.
  - K0balt 1mo ago
    This. Anthropic made at least some token effort to imagine a future where AI and humans cooperate in a constructive way and AI is not used to harm people intentionally. They learned their lesson.
    - csharpminor 1mo ago
      Are we forgetting how fast they rushed in to deploy Claude at the DoW with Palantir?
      - pastel8739 1mo ago
        I hardly see how the Dow Jones in relevant here, that’s finance
        ayewo 1mo ago
        >> Are we forgetting how fast they rushed in to deploy Claude at the DoW (Department of War) with Palantir? > I hardly see how the Dow Jones in relevant here, that’s finance Not Dow Jones. DoW = Department of War.
        pastel8739 1mo ago
        Oh sorry I forgot some people chose to subscribe to that disgusting name for the DoD
- pavlov 1mo ago
  US commentators are often incredibly misinformed about their own country’s politics because the information bubbles are so hermetic when you’re inside them.
- collingreen 1mo ago
  As an American we tend to (especially lately) make our politics into everyone's problem so feel free to comment on our politics as much as you like until further notice.
  - sam345 1mo ago
    So Europeans don't do this ? The EU is constantly trying to regulate US companies. Every time I click on a stupid cookie notice I fondly think of the EU .
    - sam-cop-vimes 1mo ago
      As much as I hate the cookie banner, it is this requirement that forced companies to disclose the massive amounts of tracking they are using when anyone visits their site.
    - globular-toast 1mo ago
      The stupid cookie notice is entirely the fault of the site you are visiting. The EU just made the site show you how it's fucking you.
      - shagie 1mo ago
        There's a cookie banner on https://european-union.europa.eu/index_en https://european-union.europa.eu/index_en and https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/679/oj/eng https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/679/oj/eng
        deleted 1mo ago
        [deleted]
        globular-toast 1mo ago
        That site is run by the EU, so those particular banners are the fault of the EU, yes. Most of the other ones you see are not, though.
- watwut 1mo ago
  I think that active voice the person responding to you used was more politically factual, objective and did not took stand. Going out of your way to hide the actor is not politically neutral action nor it represents lack of commentary.
- ncallaway 1mo ago
  > I really tend to dislike when people outside e.g. the EU comment on our politics We, uh… started a war that we’re trying to drag many European countries into, and we spent a good chunk of the last year threatening to invade a member of the EU. We’re on and off about trying to start a trade war with the EU. At this point, you have absolutely every right to comment on our politics, pretty much however you want.
LeBit 1mo ago
So, Jared has bought how many stocks of OpenAI ?
XTXinverseXTY 1mo ago
unnecessary condescension
tiahura 1mo ago
This is a bit unfair. The reporting is that admin deferred to amazon, the nsa and other outside companies. So, they pulled it for a few weeks, and then did a staggered rollout. Seems sensible to me. https://www.axios.com/2026/06/13/anthropic-amazon-white-house https://www.axios.com/2026/06/13/anthropic-amazon-white-hous...
f30e3dfed1c9 1mo ago
> the White House force Anthropic to... Careful, there's some dude here who really strenuously objects to language like that. The White House is a building, it can't force anyone to do anything!

Topfi 1mo ago

Yeah, probably (let's be honest, most certainly), right given the Admin. Avoiding commenting on my assumptions regarding the modus operandi in current day US politics because I only know it through reporting though and I really tend to dislike when people outside e.g. the EU comment on our politics in what is a very clearly narrow, uninformed manner. So it'd rather avoid altogether and occasionally ask, mainly if maybe I missed something and there actually is anything besides pure old "lobbying" to explain the difference in behaviour. Still am mainly interested why Amazon ran to the government though regarding Fable 5, I can get the angle concerning the relationship between OpenAI and the administration easily, but not the way Amazon operated. They had more to loose what with their major buy-in by Anthropic on AWS.

pas 1mo ago
it's entirely possible that that specific communication from that Amazon exec/rep (?) was just one of many "messages of concern" (and the one that eventually the WH picked)
sigmoid10 1mo ago
If you have followed news reporting, you probably heard that SamA was touring D.C. to make sure this release went without any regulation hiccups. If anything, they learned how to play the whole politics game - especially after the Anthropic fiasco. And even though all parties involved are terrible choices, more eyes on a potentially civilisation altering product does make me feel minimally better.
- lljk_kennedy 1mo ago
  More eyes or more bribes?
  - K0balt 1mo ago
    Well, somebody has to see that you bribed them, so yes?
  - sigmoid10 1mo ago
    More like not ignoring the company owned by one of the president's biggest donors warning said president's administration about your model. Anthropic basically tried to close their eyes to make this go away. Which of course backfired spectacularly and led to one of the biggest release fuck-ups of all time. OpenAI saw that and simply decided to not do it that way. Any sane business would have done the same.
- lambda 1mo ago
  And by "learned how to play the whole politics game", you mean "giving money to Donald Trump": https://www.sfgate.com/tech/article/brockman-openai-top-trump-donor-21273419.php https://www.sfgate.com/tech/article/brockman-openai-top-trum...
  - mywittyname 1mo ago
    Modern politicking is so easy.
  - tiahura 1mo ago
    I think you just have to be smart enough that when the administration calls up and says "amazon, the nsa, and half a dozen other companies say we have a problem" your response isn't "well, actually we don't."
adventured 1mo ago
Anthropic has the appearance/rep of being non-cooperative with the military industrial complex. OpenAI doesn't have that reputation. That's all.
- nullbio 1mo ago
  Exactly. OAI didn't bury themselves. They didn't have to do anything special for this, they just had to let Anthropic be Anthropic and sit on the sidelines.
- K0balt 1mo ago
  This. Anthropic made at least some token effort to imagine a future where AI and humans cooperate in a constructive way and AI is not used to harm people intentionally. They learned their lesson.
  - csharpminor 1mo ago
    Are we forgetting how fast they rushed in to deploy Claude at the DoW with Palantir?
    - pastel8739 1mo ago
      I hardly see how the Dow Jones in relevant here, that’s finance
      - ayewo 1mo ago
        >> Are we forgetting how fast they rushed in to deploy Claude at the DoW (Department of War) with Palantir? > I hardly see how the Dow Jones in relevant here, that’s finance Not Dow Jones. DoW = Department of War.
        pastel8739 1mo ago
        Oh sorry I forgot some people chose to subscribe to that disgusting name for the DoD
pavlov 1mo ago
US commentators are often incredibly misinformed about their own country’s politics because the information bubbles are so hermetic when you’re inside them.
collingreen 1mo ago
As an American we tend to (especially lately) make our politics into everyone's problem so feel free to comment on our politics as much as you like until further notice.
- sam345 1mo ago
  So Europeans don't do this ? The EU is constantly trying to regulate US companies. Every time I click on a stupid cookie notice I fondly think of the EU .
  - sam-cop-vimes 1mo ago
    As much as I hate the cookie banner, it is this requirement that forced companies to disclose the massive amounts of tracking they are using when anyone visits their site.
  - globular-toast 1mo ago
    The stupid cookie notice is entirely the fault of the site you are visiting. The EU just made the site show you how it's fucking you.
    - shagie 1mo ago
      There's a cookie banner on https://european-union.europa.eu/index_en https://european-union.europa.eu/index_en and https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/679/oj/eng https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/679/oj/eng
      - deleted 1mo ago
        [deleted]
      - globular-toast 1mo ago
        That site is run by the EU, so those particular banners are the fault of the EU, yes. Most of the other ones you see are not, though.
watwut 1mo ago
I think that active voice the person responding to you used was more politically factual, objective and did not took stand. Going out of your way to hide the actor is not politically neutral action nor it represents lack of commentary.
ncallaway 1mo ago
> I really tend to dislike when people outside e.g. the EU comment on our politics We, uh… started a war that we’re trying to drag many European countries into, and we spent a good chunk of the last year threatening to invade a member of the EU. We’re on and off about trying to start a trade war with the EU. At this point, you have absolutely every right to comment on our politics, pretty much however you want.

LeBit 1mo ago

So, Jared has bought how many stocks of OpenAI ?

XTXinverseXTY 1mo ago

unnecessary condescension

tiahura 1mo ago

This is a bit unfair. The reporting is that admin deferred to amazon, the nsa and other outside companies. So, they pulled it for a few weeks, and then did a staggered rollout. Seems sensible to me. https://www.axios.com/2026/06/13/anthropic-amazon-white-house https://www.axios.com/2026/06/13/anthropic-amazon-white-hous...

f30e3dfed1c9 1mo ago

> the White House force Anthropic to... Careful, there's some dude here who really strenuously objects to language like that. The White House is a building, it can't force anyone to do anything!