Pete Hegseth had threatened to cancel $200m contract unless it was given unfettered access to Claude model

Pete Hegseth has threatened to cancel $200m contract unless it is given unfettered access to Claude model

Anthropic said Thursday it “cannot in good conscience” comply with a demand from the Pentagon to remove safety precautions from its artificial intelligence model and grant the US military unfettered access to its AI capabilities.

The Department of Defense had threatened to cancel a $200m contract and deem Anthropic a “supply chain risk”, a designation with serious financial implications, if the company did not comply with the request by Friday.

Chief executive Dario Amodei said in a statement that the threats from the defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, would not change the company’s position, and that he hoped Hegseth would “reconsider”.

    • Buffalox@lemmy.world
      1·
      8 hours ago

      They were not a thing like they are today, where most democracies strive to observe human rights.
      For instance it wouldn’t make much sense for a government to claim to be for human rights while they extort colonies.
      And human rights have always been a thing only respected by democracies. But nowhere as much as in EU where it is a requirement.

      • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
        1·
        7 hours ago

        They were not a thing like they are today

        I disagree with your statement.

        Do I need to point to obvious examples such as the US Declaration of Independence in 1776?

        “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”

        And human rights have always been a thing only respected by democracies. But nowhere as much as in EU where it is a requirement.

        Even ancient Rome had a number of things legally protected that we call “human rights” today. I think you’re conveniently cherry picking conditions and a time to make your statement true ignoring history. You’re welcome to do that, but I believe that’s intellectually dishonest. You’re free to your opinion and your position though, so I’ll leave you to it. Thank you for conversing up to now. I hope you have a great day.

        • Buffalox@lemmy.world
          1·
          7 hours ago

          the US Declaration of Independence in 1776?

          You are only proving my point, this was from when USA was created as a democracy.

          We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal

          Except for slaves and women, so no that is not a declaration of respect for human rights as we understand them today. But it was a start.

          But even if the meaning was good, USA no-longer respect the values of democracy. Many other democracies do.