America Used Anthropic's AI for Its Attack On Iran, One Day After Banning It (engadget.com) 64
Engadget reports:
In a lengthy post on Truth Social on February 27, President Trump ordered all federal agencies to "immediately cease all use of Anthropic's technology" following strong disagreements between the Department of Defense and the AI company. A few hours later, the U.S. conducted a major air attack on Iran with the help of Anthropic's AI tools, according to a report from The Wall Street Journal.
Even Trump's post noted there would be a six-month phase-out for Anthropic's technology (adding that Anthropic "better get their act together, and be helpful during this phase out period, or I will use the Full Power of the Presidency to make them comply, with major civil and criminal consequences to follow.")
Anthropic's Claude technology was also used by the U.S. military less than two months ago in its operation in Venezuela — reportedly making them the first AI developer known to be used in a classified U.S. War Department operation. The Wall Street Journal reported Anthropic's technology found its way into the mission through Anthropic's contract with Palintir.
Even Trump's post noted there would be a six-month phase-out for Anthropic's technology (adding that Anthropic "better get their act together, and be helpful during this phase out period, or I will use the Full Power of the Presidency to make them comply, with major civil and criminal consequences to follow.")
Anthropic's Claude technology was also used by the U.S. military less than two months ago in its operation in Venezuela — reportedly making them the first AI developer known to be used in a classified U.S. War Department operation. The Wall Street Journal reported Anthropic's technology found its way into the mission through Anthropic's contract with Palintir.
U.S. War Department? (Score:5, Insightful)
Bullshit! It is the Department of Defense and no amount name changing by those intellectual teenagers in the alleged administration or Private Bonespurs changes that. It requires an act of Congress.
Re:U.S. War Department? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why don't you do the slightest bit of research before posting. Yes it absolutely does require an act of Congress to rename the Department of Defense officially and legally. He signed an executive order allowing a couple secondary names to be used in public communications, he is pretending to rename it by dead-naming its official name and giving the department a nickname.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Rules written on paper is soooo last century bro. Get with the times.
(the reason nothing is written down is that the rules would logically negate each other, so we are left with following unwritten rules. Of course, all previous written rules will be followed with lip service, but will bend to the unwritten rules as needed)
Re: (Score:3)
Does it? The department falls under the executive branch and this isn't directly a budgetary issue.
Yes you got one of the two words. Budget and ... the one you're missing is "oversight".
In fact the War Department was created by Congress in 1789. It may have the president as commander in chief, but that doesn't mean he gets to just change the name.
If you think congress is just about budgets then it's even more important that congress address the failing school system in America. I mean how is it that I know more about this than you and I'm not even American? How can someone fail so badly.
Re: (Score:3)
In fact the War Department was created by Congress in 1789
For completeness, here's the full history:
August 7, 1789, Congress created the Department of War. Note that this was land-based forces, only, there was no navy. Some frigates were constructed starting in 1794, managed by the Department of War, but it wasn't really the DoW's job.
July 11, 1798, Congress created the Department of the Navy. It included the Marine Corps, of course. It remained an entirely separate organization from the Department of War for nearly 150 years.
July 27, 1947, Congress unifie
Re: U.S. War Department? (Score:1)
Re: U.S. War Department? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
I mean a bunch of people like yourself protested in the streets of New York against the US strikes while Iranians are celebrating all over the world:
Iranians are celebrating that a terrible leader is dead.
Americans are protesting that the U.S. used its military to depose a foreign leader with absolutely no plan whatsoever about how to go from there to a functioning society in that country, just weeks after the last time the military deposed another foreign leader in Venezuela, also without any sort of forward-looking plan.
Iranians celebrating the death of a terrible leader doesn't result in a functioning government in their country. It doesn't prevent
Re: U.S. War Department? (Score:1)
Re: U.S. War Department? (Score:2)
There's just no making some people happy. I'd think you'd praise the renaming as a moment of clarity / truth in advertising. When is the last time the DoD worked in a purely defensive capacity? Never? It was a highly optimistic name from the start.
Besides, it was the War Office / War Department up to the end of WWII. If anything the renaming was returning it to its roots.
Re: (Score:2)
While I agree it's the correct name, I believe the authorizing legislation specifies a different name.
Re: (Score:2)
United States service members dying
How precious. Pretending you care about the fate of US soldiers.
Re: (Score:2)
Takes a while to ban software (Score:3)
Approval for classified data (Score:3)
Re:Approval for classified data (Score:5, Insightful)
I recall someone stated that Anthropic was the only AI technology company then approved for classified data. That does not say that other AI companies have not received, or can not receive, those approvals, but that evaluation process takes time, and swapping out to another technology, is not going to happen quickly.
Quit pretending this current administration does anything except follow the whims of the sitting president and his handlers - all of whom couldn't care less about doing things correctly or even intelligently. Trump will give access to classified data to whatever bozo (or group of bozos) suits his addled fancy at any given point in time.
Heck, he's given classified information to foreign agents at social gatherings.
Re:Approval for classified data (Score:5, Interesting)
Elon and his cronies already siphoned off all the classified data with impunity.
Re: (Score:2)
Would you like to play a game? (Score:1)
The game is called Find the Old Man. All you have to do is find where the Old Man is hiding. Here is what we know about the Old Man...
Land of the free? (Score:2)
better get their act together, and be helpful during this phase out period, or I will use the Full Power of the Presidency to make them comply, with major civil and criminal consequences to follow.
Sounds more like China or Russia to me...
House of cards (Score:5, Interesting)
NvIdia has over 10B in Anthropic.
Microsoft has over 5B
Amazon has over 8B
If Anthropic is deemed a "supply chain risk", then all of these companies will be legally forced to divest. Their investments will get pennies on the dollar in the fire sale.
And they are the tip of the iceberg.
Re:House of cards (Score:4, Informative)
Also, with Trump effectively removing Anthropic from being utilized, that would negate any prospective risk due to it no longer being a qualified component to fulfill any government contracts. (And since the designation only applies to such contracts, the private sector is forever at will to utilize Anthropic for whatever non-governmental work they've been conducting forevermore.)
In other words, the potential "supply chain risk" designation combined with Trump's declarations forbidding Anthropic results in an entire nothingburger.
Re: (Score:2)
You seem to not understand the "chain" part of "supply chain".
Re: (Score:2)
You seem to not understand the "chain" part of "supply chain".
You seem to NOT understand the scope of any such designation: The Pentagon's scope is everything within its purview -- distinctly NOT for things beyond the realm of the military's activities. Aspects pertaining to the federal Executive Branch (like DOJ) are outside of the Pentagon's scope.
However, the Pentagon's presidential briefings would make note of the designation for the US President to consider their own actions. And this is what President Trump did by declaring Anthropic is no longer welcome with
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
would this be enough to burst the AI bubble?
Re: (Score:2)
It worked so well last time https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Let's try it again. Surely the results will be better!
Re: Deep State Ownership of Slashdot? (Score:5, Interesting)
Finish what job? He hasn't got a job in mind other than a showing off the US military, getting attention and distracting from the Epstein files.
There's no plan. It might turn out better, but then again, it might turn out worse. Hey remember when America and the UK toppled the Iranian government and installed the Shah who then got replaced with someone even worse?
Re: Deep State Ownership of Slashdot? (Score:4, Insightful)
"Finish the job"?
What western power has ever been able to "finish the job" when trying to topple a regime? You can't just barge into the china shop, break every plate in the place, then say "job finished, please build your democracy now, and you're welcome!". That's a job that has no finish.
Re: (Score:1)
"A user" has moderated your comment "Overrated"
lol looks like I hit a nerve. not that I'm at ALL surprised.
Re:Trump is already calling for a ceasefire (Score:5, Interesting)
Fetterman suffered a debilitating stroke and then proudly proclaimed he can see clearly and became a republican. https://newrepublic.com/post/1... [newrepublic.com]
Re: (Score:1)
I am genuinely impressed that he managed to get under other people's skin like that. Truly jealous of how he controls you.
Re: (Score:2)
If you equate a random person on the internet to someone who has a meaningful impact on the lives of people across the entire world then I don't know what to tell you. Actually I'm not even sure you're intelligent enough to read this post.
Re: (Score:3)
Kinda seems like the goal might have been to tank negotiations. The US/Israel tactic for decades have been derailing talks by killing leaders and diplomats.
"uses" tool (Score:2)
There is no real clue as to what that "use" is.
The military "uses" Windows and "uses" Linux as operating systems. Yeah, they have computers. They run software. Is this expected? Kinda. I'll bet they use Adobe Acrobat too for all of their PDF documents.
What were the "uses" of the AI tool? Did it summarize a document that someone typed? Was it filling out fluffy bullshit in a work email about what someone had for lunch? Or did the AI generate a war plan? These are vastly different realms.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: "uses" tool (Score:2)
Actually uses are very well known. Anthropic banned uses that automate targeting or do mass surveillance of Americans, and that drove the break. So use actually means Claude is handling decisions to who to kill and where.
Killer features (Score:2)
Can't shake hands with the Devil... (Score:2)
Anthropic's technology found its way into the mission through Anthropic's contract with Palintir.
Re: Can't shake hands with the Devil... (Score:2)
Sure you can! After the leak comes out from your head of safety to a major paper, as it did. You can also orchestrate theatrics that attempt to remove responsibility for it.
Pathetic pettiness (Score:2)
NYT has an article about what went down with the Anthropic and OpenAI negotiations. It was all about petty personal grievances by the Dept of Defense negotiator. Acting like three year olds has become standard operating procedure for this administration.
Lets see how long the Chinese take... (Score:1)
... to hack into these systems and read everything. With the current incompetence of the US administration, my guess is not long.
Modern warfare is ironic (Score:2)
As I imply in my sig: "The biggest challenge of the 21st century is the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity."
And expand on here: "Recognizing irony is key to transcending militarism"
https://pdfernhout.net/recogni... [pdfernhout.net]
====
Military robots like drones are ironic because they are created essentially to force humans to work like robots in an industrialized social order. Why not just create industrial robots to do the work instead?
Nuclear weapons are ironic b