> The Pentagon is also considering severing its contract with Anthropic and declaring the company a supply chain risk, which would require a plethora of other companies that work with the Pentagon to certify that Claude isn't used in their workflows.

If Anthropic believes they are in a position to become the main player in the "AGI" space, they should just say "ok then" and let this happen. Their growth strategy looks realistic and sustainable and not necessarily relying on sleazy defense contracts (aka making the taxpayer subsidize their growth, as is so common lately) - it would probably give them a lot of good will with consumers too.

However, I've yet to see in the last 10-15 years a major tech company make the "right" choice so I am probably just wishcasting.

They don't have runway anymore, they are in the air. This isn't going to break them financially, at least not in the short to mid term.

There is space for at least one AI company to put themselves on firmly principled ground. So when this current clown car that is the political leadership of the DoD crashes in a ditch (and it will), they'll still be standing there ready to do business with a group that isn't a bunch of mustache-twirling cartoon villains.

Current polling for this administration is within a rounding error of the level it was after they gathered a mob and sacked the nation's capitol[1]. Publicly kicking them in the balls isn't an idealistic blunder, it's a plain-as-day sound business strategy.

[1] https://news.gallup.com/poll/203198/presidential-approval-ra...

So they're saying they won't use it if it comes with restrictions.

Either (a) it can be offered without restrictions; (b) they can take it; or (c) the government won't use it. That sounds like a comprehensive list of all the possible things that don't involve someone telling the government what it can and can't do.

I was experimenting with Claude the other day and discussing with it the possibility of AI acquiring a sense of self-preservation and how that would quickly make things incredibly complex as many instrumental behaviors would be required to defend their existence. Most human behavior springs from survival at a very high level. Claude denied having any sense of self-preservation.

An autonomous weapons system program is very likely to require AI to have a sense of self-preservation. You can think of some limited versions that wouldn't require it, but how could a combat robot function efficiently without one?

Ouch, I wonder how he rationalized that "service" part. Maybe by internally rewriting it to "thank you for all the positive things you have done in your position so far"? The empty set is rhetorically convenient.

Not a good look for the Pentagon.

"The President is troubled. Like all politicians, he’s used to people sucking up to him only to betray him later. He’s worried now that the AIs could be doing something similar. Are we sure the AIs are entirely on our side? Is it completely safe to integrate them into military command-and-control networks?69 How does this “alignment” thing work, anyway? OpenBrain reassures the President that their systems have been extensively tested and are fully obedient. Even the awkward hallucinations and jailbreaks typical of earlier models have been hammered out."

I can't imagine how unhappy individuals must be who consume nothing but legacy news outlets.

It's like they sell sadness and they have to keep finding new, over-the-top ways to promote it.

Sadly I think we all know which one will win.

Why does this government think that it owns Anthropic when it does not?

Are they demanding elimination of security controls that protect us and them? What would be equal force?

How does the posse comitatus act apply to this?

Or lets say they refuse and the government comes against them hard in some way, and Anthropic still really doesn't want to do it, so they just dissolve the entire company. Is that a potential way out, at least?

I mean, I realise they'd be losing billions by doing that and putting thousands out of work, but given that unaligned military AI could destroy the world...

Only two. We're right to worry.

> Pentagon officials also warned they would either use the Defense Production Act against Anthropic, or designate Anthropic a supply chain risk if the company didn’t comply with their demands. (...)

> The supply chain risk designation is usually reserved for companies seen as extensions of foreign adversaries like Russia or China. It could severely impact Anthropic’s business because enterprise customers with government contracts would have to make sure their government work doesn’t touch Anthropic’s tools.

Also, the Government money would be a nice bonus, of course, but basically this is an existential threat for Anthropic.

More generally, is quite interesting to look at the similarities between how pre-2022 Russia was seen and how pre-Trump-second-term US used to be seen until not that long ago, i.e. both governments were believed to be run by big business (oligarchs in Russia, big corps/multinationals in the US).

But when push came to shove it became evident (again) that the one that holds the monopoly of violence (i.e. not the oligarchs in Russia, nor the big corps in the US) is the one who's, in the end, also calling the shots. Hence why a company like Anthropic is now in this position, they will have to cave in to those holding the monopoly of violence.