2 ms·
Okay but when it's US "warfighters" making missiles it's good? Pretty hypocritical that isn't in the the "threat report" too. > We are very proud of the work w
by tkel 20d ago
Okay but when it's US "warfighters" making missiles it's good? Pretty hypocritical that isn't in the the "threat report" too.
> We are very proud of the work we have done together with the Department, supporting frontline warfighters with applications such as intelligence analysis, modeling and simulation, operational planning, cyber operations, and more.
https://www.anthropic.com/news/where-stand-department-war https://www.anthropic.com/news/where-stand-department-war
- dylan604 20d agoWhen it's a US company operating under US regulations, yes, it is quite different. This is the point of things like ITAR. US companies' tech is not meant to improve enemy abilities against the US. Using US companies' tech to improve US abilities is expected. I don't think that's hypocritical for the US government to have that expectation
- allears 20d agoNot hypocritical, just foolish. The US may "expect" it, but there are so many possible leaks that it's not technically possible.
- dylan604 20d agoIt's just another example of tech out running legislation. Back when PGP was regulated, the internet was not so ubiquitous and was easier to try to keep the genie in the bottle. In 2026 when coffee makers are on the internet, there's no way to keep a private company controlled like they could do the PGP