this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2026
546 points (98.6% liked)

Technology

82329 readers
4371 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Hacker News.

The Department of War has stated they will only contract with AI companies who accede to “any lawful use” and remove safeguards in the cases mentioned above. They have threatened to remove us from their systems if we maintain these safeguards; they have also threatened to designate us a “supply chain risk”—a label reserved for US adversaries, never before applied to an American company—and to invoke the Defense Production Act to force the safeguards’ removal. These latter two threats are inherently contradictory: one labels us a security risk; the other labels Claude as essential to national security.

Regardless, these threats do not change our position: we cannot in good conscience accede to their request.

It is the Department’s prerogative to select contractors most aligned with their vision. But given the substantial value that Anthropic’s technology provides to our armed forces, we hope they reconsider. Our strong preference is to continue to serve the Department and our warfighters—with our two requested safeguards in place. Should the Department choose to offboard Anthropic, we will work to enable a smooth transition to another provider, avoiding any disruption to ongoing military planning, operations, or other critical missions. Our models will be available on the expansive terms we have proposed for as long as required.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] revolutionaryvole@lemmy.world 125 points 1 week ago (15 children)

I guess it's good that they draw the line somewhere, but it is absolutely horrifying to me as a non-American that the moral stance is limited to:

  • taking issue with fully autonomous AI weapons (purely for technical reasons according to this letter, they are working hard on making them possible)
  • refusing to conduct mass surveillance of US citizens specifically (foreign nationals are fair game and the intelligence apparatus will surely only be used for good and to preserve democracy).

This is not Anthropic refusing to cooperate with the Trump administration as the title may suggest, they are in fact explicitly eager to serve the US Department of War. They are just vying for slightly better contract terms.

[–] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 43 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You're spot-on. As some additional context, Anthropic is already working tightly with the US government. Until the recent announcement regarding Grok, Anthropic was the only approved AI for US government work, as it is/was the only one certified for safely woeking with classified data.

[–] BanMe@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

And now they're the only one banned from it.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] XLE@piefed.social 68 points 1 week ago (3 children)
[–] Kissaki@feddit.org 13 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Those two safeguards they deny to remove must be quite the thing.

[–] SpacetimeMachine@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago

Or they are just doing this for optics, with an understanding that the feds will end up forcing their hand in the future.

[–] mondomon@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

I was listening to NPR yesterday and heard the two are apparently mass surveillance of Americans and autonomous weapons systems with no human interaction..

[–] criss_cross@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It’s probably more they don’t wanna get blamed if AI launches missiles because the idiots in charge pressed shift+tab and yolo’d.

Claude: “You’re right. I completely committed a war crime. I’m so very sorry! How would you like to proceed?”

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] andallthat@lemmy.world 55 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Amodei "we cannot in good conscience allow this".

Hegseth looks confused, turns towards his team and mouths "...in good what?""

[–] Klear@quokk.au 2 points 4 days ago

My conscience is clean. It's never been used!

[–] XLE@piefed.social 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

"Anthropic publicly praised President Trump’s AI Action Plan," said CEO Dario Amodei.

"We have been supportive of the President’s efforts to expand energy provision in the US in order to win the AI race," he continued, apparently talking about Trump's new anti green energy, pro fossil fuel program.

[–] andallthat@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

yes... mine was just a play on the title of this post.

Look, I'm not saying that Amodei is a saint and I do find him as full of shit as Altman with their AGI promises, but would you expect Anthropic to take a stand against increasing AI investment, because it's coming from Trump? And I don't like that he went looking for funding in the Middle East either.

I just think there is an ethical line between "I do business with people who do bad things" and "I'm actively helping people who do bad things to do them in a more efficient way". It might be a fine line and it might also be that they are just posturing, but it's still more than other companies did (companies that are a lot richer than Anthropic and that don't need to find a lot of funding just to stay afloat).

[–] XLE@piefed.social 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

My reply was a continuation of your joke, just using Dario's actual words. My point is that he too lacks a conscience (see also, the other links I've posted)

[–] andallthat@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

Gotcha! Shit, I barely understand my own jokes... 😅

[–] Crozekiel@lemmy.zip 43 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

So the government wants "full self-driving" attack drones. You know, just in case the military actually disobeys an unlawful order?

How many pieces of science fiction do we have where the "bad guys" are literally just killer robots we created and then realized we didn't have control over? Why would we decide it is a good idea to literally build terminators? I'm convinced the government will actually build the "orphan crushing machine" next...

[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago

Because we literally are allowing the pedofile parasite class to rule over us

[–] pkjqpg1h@lemmy.zip 27 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Did we read the same thing?

We support the use of AI for lawful foreign intelligence and counterintelligence missions. But using these systems for mass domestic surveillance is incompatible with democratic values.

So they accept surveillance in other countries? What about other countries’ democratic values?

Even fully autonomous weapons (those that take humans out of the loop entirely and automate selecting and engaging targets) may prove critical for our national defense. But today, frontier AI systems are simply not reliable enough to power fully autonomous weapons.

So you don’t because it still sucks? But if it didn’t, you would?

And what about legal?

  • Do Not Develop or Design Weapons???
  • Do Not Compromise Privacy or Identity Rights???

I’ve really lost my faith in the US. They think they hold the power, but they’re missing the point: real power is built on trust-and we’re losing more of it every day.

[–] 1984@lemmy.today 3 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Its been an american leadership view for as long as ive been alive that American lives are worth at least a hundred times more than other lives.

That is, in war situations, not in situations where leadership takes care of its citizens. No, there those lives are worth next to nothing. So American leadership is pretty much at war both with its own people and countries who dont want American culture.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works 16 points 1 week ago

"... Without a subscription. For the full, unlocked dictatorship just the low low price of a bajillion dollars a month will give you the power you need to defeat your enemies."

[–] melfie@lemy.lol 15 points 1 week ago

cannot in good conscience

🤣

[–] aproposnix@scribe.disroot.org 15 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I will admit that I am very cynical right now when it comes to multibillion dollar companies. I can also see it as being possible that he (the CEO) does not want his technology to be used for mass surveillance or Autonomous drone swarms. But seeing what we know, how corporations are acting and how they are protecting their own financial interest, this is, after all, capitalism, it would not surprise me if this is just a public facing statement that he is making so that he doesn't lose public support. And privately, he is going to flip and help the US government. And of course Pete Hegeth is just going to say that he compelled them to do it through some law. But again, I am very cynical.

[–] Iconoclast@feddit.uk 14 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Anthropic founders are former OpenAI employees who left specifically because they disagreed with OpenAI's stance on this kind of stuff and they wanted nothing to do with it. If this is just a PR stunt then I don't see why they would've left OpenAI in the first place.

[–] andallthat@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

yes, too soon. It took years and several bajillions in profit for Google to remove the "don't be evil" motto

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] doomguin@piefed.zip 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Doesn't support mass surveillance on US Citizens

Apparently everyone else is fair game.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I read somewhere that Anthropic has $18,000,000,000 in commitments from last year alone, so conceivably, they can stand to lose a mere $200,000,000 and it won't create a huge issue for them in the short term.

I hope that's how they're looking at it.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 week ago (6 children)

How is a private company the voice of reason in this?

[–] Iconoclast@feddit.uk 12 points 1 week ago (18 children)

Anthropic was founded by former OpenAI employees who left largely due to ethical and safety concerns about how OpenAI was being run. This is just them sticking to their principles.

[–] SuspciousCarrot78@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago (3 children)

...because every now and again, for the briefest of moments, one them shows themselves not to be run by entirely evil, lecherous humps?

Blink and you (or the shareholders) might miss it.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 week ago

While I'm glad they're drawing a line, they're only splitting hairs. Anthropic is already deeply working with the US gov.

[–] jacksilver@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

What a company says and what a company actually does are not the same thing.

[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 week ago

They're not. Conscience has nothing to do with this.

They just don't think the PR hit is worth it.

Whenever companies choose to act in a way that we perceive as good, we were the voice of reason, not them.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au 10 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Wtf, I never would have expected this level of resistance. What’s the catch, fear of intentional reprisals?

[–] Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 week ago

I imagine partly liability concerns, partly protecting their reputation.

Basically they don't want their technology being used for something it's not ready for, something going badly wrong, and them getting the blame.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 9 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Are those the same AI systems that recommended nuclear escalation in 90% of simulations?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] BC_viper@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

And I see the big baby in chief has answered in typical baby fashion.

[–] vithigar@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I can't see the name "anthropic" without thinking about furries.

Anthro pic.

Now you can't either. You're welcome.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›