Anthropic still is scum for being completely fine helping America oppress the rest of the world.

Well, judge not lest you too be judged...

There is no such thing as "ethical" AI coming from Big Tech. Google, Microsoft, Anthropic, Amazon, all of them built their machines without consent, all their machines have been subsidized with our taxes and resources, and Anthropic is a pro-Trump pro-foreign-dictator company that crossed every single red line until the very last one.

Anthropic was pro mass surveillance of foreigners.

It was okay with helping Trump plan criminal invasions.

It just doesn't want to be held responsible for pushing the "go" button, but we know their software was one suggestion away from doing it anyway.

With their last link, they're complicit

Oh man, I’ve seen FM 3 times live, honestly the best concerts I’ve ever been to - something about their music just brings out the best energy in everyone

I can't believe now we (Americans) have to pay for it with our tax dollars.

I cannot believe this is what it took for a boycott to go more mainstream. Tell me more about how so many people have no respect for the environment or the artists who's work they gleefully consume.

That's true, people can grow and change. Heck, I used CharacterAI for a very, very brief period when I was lying to myself about it's impact on not just the world and artists but myself too. I quickly realized I couldn't defend it, and I didn't like how it was affecting me personally either so I quickly got rid of it. Been strongly anti-"AI" ever since.

HOWEVER, I also think it is worth criticizing those who are only giving it up now, because that's absurd. We've all know for ages that this stuff is horrible for everybody and everything an disrespectful to artists, and it doesn't even take much thinking to come to that conclusion on your own. If this is the tipping point that makes someone give up "AI", I still consider them a fucking idiot. I'm just glad their stupidity is harming everyone else a bit less now.

Your employer is making you pay for it?

The fact that the Trump administration can create web sites saying whatever it pleases does not make the name change legitimate.

Altman is a symptom, not the problem. The problem is capitalism.

That’s very true; I still would love to see him guillotined.

Good luck with that dude

It was always about the money.

Windows Central should be advocating for return of Windows Phone.

I think you're in denial. If they had changed the name of Homeland Security into the dep of National Security for example, you probably wouldn't say that media outlets is parroting the us government.

Also, mass surveillance. Not surveillance itself. And fully autonomous weapons.

Don't get distracted by the birdy folks, Anthropic is not your friend, or some great protector of the American people. They were already deeply embedded in the US Government as their product was the only one certified for use with classified documents.

They weren't standing up for us, they were splitting hairs on exactly how far they'd openly go.

I've also seen statements that Anthropic's stance against fully autonomous weapons was simply due to results not yet being as consistent as they were comfortable putting their name on, not due to any opposition towards use in/with weaponry.

OpenAI also claims to have the same limitations. So someone's lying.

I think you missed some news. There is officially a Department of War again.

Edit: I am very wrong.

I would.

Because it's still officially called the Department of Defense; only Congress can rename it.

More broadly, it illustrates the administration's use of illegal boat strikes and regime change as foreign policy tools.

Only Congress can change the name of the Department of Defense, and not only has it not passed any legislation to do so, but the most National Defense Authorization Act, which was passed after Trump's executive order, only mentions the "Department of Defense" and never the "Department of War".

So, no, there is not officially a Department of War, there continues to only officially be a Department of Defense.

This honestly strikes me as a story people don't understand. Mass surveillance is not lawful and the government thus agreed not to do that. However, they still needed the guardrails removed. People interpret this as them wanting mass surveillance, but that's not necessarily true.

I work for a company that uses AI for legal work, processing and analyzing court cases, discovery documents, etc. We had problems with AI models like Gemini and GPT refusing to do what we needed because of guardrails against violence and abuse of minors. It refused to discuss and analyze cases that involved murders described in detail, or cases involving child molestation, etc. We weren't using it for unlawful purposes, very much the opposite.

I feel like if people knew that we, like the DoD, had to use uncensored models that allowed such things, people would complain "Wow, you guys are trying to remove guardrails for child expoitation and violence! How terrible!"

Is it so shocking that a military needs their AI to work with such things even if they're not implementing it? They cannot afford to have AI in critical moments be like "sorry, my guidelines say I can't help with this."

This seems like the time Trump advised against pregnant women against using Tylenol. So people started buying and using it in protest. This is yet another reaction to Trump punishing them, but people are pretending Anthropic is making a stand for the people and OpenAI is somehow not. It's not that simple. Though now Anthropic is eating it up, especially after this last week when they started pissing on the entire tech community that started hating on them.

I "use" ChatGPT because my employer has forced it into the workflow, and they're the ones paying OpenAI. So I now have a linear relationship with ChatGPT through my employer. The more work I do, the more I use ChatGPT, even though I do not have a choice in the matter and if it were up to me I'd not be using any AI tools at all.

Using it is now part of my performance evaluation beginning this year.

Shame on you and your company for introducing AI at all into such sensitive matters. This issue is not just about security and privacy but about outsourcing human judgement when human life is on the line.

OK, and the point of the thread was that it's still a good thing if they quit it now. No one can undo past mistakes but you can decide not to keep making them.

No. Trump declared it changed, much like Michael Scott declaring bankruptcy. Until there is an act of Congress changing the name, it is still the DoD, and the Kennedy Center is the Kennedy Center, and so on.

Amodei said in an interview that the DoW altered their contract to appear to compromise, so that it looked like they were agreeing to those use limits. But that legalese accompanying the updates rendered that text pointless. Basically, “We won’t use Claude for mass domestic surveillance and full automated killing, unless we really want to.” My guess is OpenAI signed the exact same contract and just pretended not to understand the toothlessness of the guardrails.

Well no Irishman is a Scotsman so that tracks

Oh, well today I learned. I had assumed that even the world's dumbest government officials wouldn't refer to themselves as being part of a department that doesn't actually exist, but here we are.

Thanks for laying it out for me!

So many companies are cozying up to the fascist regime as this is the late stage of capitalism.

A list of some of these companies:
https://x.com/vxunderground/status/2024200204296061089?s=20

Your link isn't valid.

List is hosted on a facism aligned owner's misinformation site

Ok

Wait. You still trust human judgment that much?

My company has facilitated the filings of hundreds of litigants representing themselves who cannot afford lawyers, helped swamped public defenders with more cases than they could ever hope to defend without just making plea deals.

Meanwhile you probably sit around complaining about prison industrial complex and corrupt justice system. Doing nothing. Taking a moral high ground while being utterly worthless.

Platitudes aren't helping anyone.

They won't.

Sam Altman is objectively a bad human being.

I've been "canceling" them since they first showed up and I used it for 5 minutes and realized how terrible it is, but nice to see others catching up.

whoosh

Yea, I can just imagine OpenAI is really struggling with their business decision.

On the one hand, they have multi-billion dollar contracts with the US Military that will make them all fabulously wealthy beyond their wildest dreams.

On the other, they have a handful of individuals leaving that might amount to a few thousand dollars of lost revenue.

Gosh, it must sure have been a tough choice.

And it's still the Gulf of Mexico. I used to call it "the gulf" but now I have to call it the Gulf of Mexico.

You can do a good thing now, and have done a shit thing in the past. I dont understand why thats so hard to grasp. We aren't absolved of shitty behavior because we didnt know better. A person who murders someone before they knew it was wrong will still have murdered someone. You can't absolve your own past by future actions, just try not to repeat it.

The military, the department of government responsible for mass murder, should not have any fucking AI in their system, absolutely anywhere. Doubly so without any sort of guardrails.

he/she says, and posts a link to one of those companies ...

Why? I can't think of any reason that would not also preclude their usage if all computer assisted tools.

Not a great look, no.

Sam Altman is just some fail upward money guy, he's been eventually removed from basically every prior position he has held.

Yes, there are applications that can be used for good or evil. But being super reductive and claiming the whole internet has tons of negative uses is ridiculous. The internet itself is a series of protocols running on communications hardware.

It is up to the users of the applications to judge whether the application is inherently positive or negative, or whether the use of the technology is being handled in a positive and/or ethical manner. And more so, it's up to the user to judge wether the technology aligns with their personal values.

Social networks: Xitter, Farcebook, Instawhore, TikTok, Reddit... all of them have proven they are platforms of manipulation, so I walked away. In fact, most of them I walked away from before it was shown how just how bad they were.

Cryptocurrencies: had the opportunity to be good, but grifters set in on them, so I never got involved.

NFTs: the next generation of CryptoGrifters, stayed away.

AI: has never been ready to be a public application / platform. That has been apparent for the last 3-5 years. If you didn't read and pay attention to the signs and still signed up for an account despite all the warnings being out there, then yes, you have aided and abetted in the use of the technology in manners that are going to have a severely negative impact on the world.

Here's the thing: we have a long, long history with technology. We know that it can be used for both good and bad. However, we also should have evolved in our thinking over the past 6-7 decades in terms of how technologies are being applied.

Nuclear reactors: Mostly good with negative side effects. Judgment on this needed longer terms study to understand it's implication. Nuclear bombs? Clearly evil.

Cassette recorders, VCRs, CD Recorders: predominantly good, but open to bad uses (i.e., piracy). The balance: mostly good, minimal negative effects

AI? Potentially good, but immediately threw up huge red flags in terms of negative uses (deep fakes, revenge porn, etc.). Even AI researchers have expressed concerns over the direction of the research.

The thing is, technology is something that we've lived with since the industrial revolution. Every single technological invention since that time has had major implications for it's impact on society. We can choose, on an individual basis, how that impact is shaped. If you chose to use a technology, then you are better that it's uses will align with your values. Don't cry when it's used in ways that don't align with your values, or is used against you.

I am canceling my subscription now. Fuckers.