正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

Pentagon Official Explains Anthropic’s Supply Chain Risk Designation Friedberg: “ Why designate them as a supply chain risk? Why not just abandon them, move on, use the other vendors? Why take this kind of punitive action?” Under Secretary of War Emil Michael: “I don't view it as punitive, and...

74,690 次观看 • 4 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

“You're not entitled to get what you want. I love you. You're entitled to earn what you're willing to go work for. And that's true in our families, in our parenting, in our marriage, in our companies, in society. If we want it, go earn it. If that's positivity, have positivity. I think and I am a positive person. I am jacked. I am excited. Obviously, you can feel my energy through technology here, I hope. Frankly, think positive people just need to get a lot stronger. I really do. I mean, I don't want to call them weak because people hear that differently but it kind of is. Look, if you want that positivity to stick, you’ve got to get tougher. Not sacrifice your love and your care and your empathy, but you got to get tough. And then we have to figure out how to love the people who are cynical because I don't think there's a ton of bad people in the world and I don't think there's a ton of bad people on teams. But I do think there are people who've been burned out. I do think there are people who have been through things in their lives. They've been through things in their company. They're experiencing stuff somewhere else. For whatever reason, they just kind of got run down and cynical and negative, or whatever. Or they're just wired a little different than we are. And I don't to hate on those people. I want to win those people. They don't have to be like me. They don't have to have my energy. But I want those people on my team. I want to love those people. And if eventually they choose that they don't believe in the same things that I believe in, I want to make it really clear and obvious that they don't want to be on this team because we're not about that. You know what I'm saying? I want it to be very easy, obvious, that, ‘Hey I should not be on this team. Because this team is full of very positive people who have great energy and talk to people, not about them.’ And we solve problems. We don't complain. We don't get defensive. We're real. I recognize I'm imperfect and I'm vulnerable to show you that about me. I want to be on that kind of a team. And if there's somebody who doesn’t believe in that stuff, I want to make it really easy for them to say, ‘Look, I don't want to be on this team. I don't wanna live like you guys live. I don't want do what you guys do.’ And then I really hope that that person leaves us and goes and joins our competitor.”

Brian Kight

38,031 次观看 • 1 年前

Anthropic vs the Pentagon: The Inside Story by Emil Michael The Full Timeline ❓Backstory: Why Anthropic? – Anthropic benefited from Biden’s AI executive order, was designated as an early winner – They smartly used this designation to sell into military and intelligence agencies, with forward-deployed engineers (Palantir style) – Became deeply integrated into DoW workflows, far ahead of other frontier model competitors 📜Tensions Rise Over Restrictive ToS – Anthropic's contracts had a long list of prohibited use cases, incl. certain war-game scenarios – Emil found this incompatible with DoW's mission, pushed for an "all lawful use" standard 🇻🇪Trigger Point: The Maduro Raid – After the Maduro raid, an Anthropic exec contacted Palantir, asking if their software was used, implying a potential ToS violation – This alarmed DoW: what if a guardrail or refusal triggered mid-operation, putting soldiers at risk? – Also raised insider threat concerns: what if a rogue developer poisoned or manipulated the model? 🧠Core Issue: Anthropic’s Own “Constitution” – Emil’s core objection: Anthropic has its own "constitution" and values, which is NOT the US Constitution – This, combined with a restrictive ToS, means the DoW could be subject to the ideological preferences of a private CEO 📊Rival Model Comps: – xAI: Fully on board for all lawful use cases across all networks, maximally truth seeking – Google: Have all lawful use on non-classified networks, working on infrastructure buildout for classified – OpenAI: Cooperative, Sam Altman even tried to broker a deal to help Anthropic 🍿Sam Altman’s Role: – Asked Emil to not designate Anthropic as a supply chain risk – Tried to negotiate blanket terms that Anthropic would find acceptable – Did this while being trashed by Dario 🚨Supply Chain Risk Designation: – Emil said it was protective, not punitive – Reasoning: If Anthropic's model has policy bias baked in, DoW doesn't want it embedded at defense contractors – The concern is that ideological bias could compound across the defense supply chain

The All-In Podcast

129,344 次观看 • 4 个月前

Alex Karp's take on the Department of War designating Anthropic as a supply chain risk: "In the warfighting context, the Department of War has to be the arbiter of what gets deployed." "I want to split domestic and foreign. In this country have God-given rights [like the First, Second, and Fourth Amendments]...Adversaries trying to kill us do not have those rights. And I've never believed in extending our rights to foreign countries that are adversarial to us." "On domestic stuff...there are real issues. I'm super sympathetic with restrictions around the use of these products in the domestic context." "Just to give you an example, there are datasets that are publicly available in the US market that I don't think should be used against you and me in a law enforcement context with the help of AI agents and ontology." "But if you don't use [this] on the battlefield, obviously Iran's going to use [it]. You don't think they can go online and buy those products?" "Without going into somewhat classified data, those things in combination with other things — [they're] lethal. A lot of people who want to hurt America end up dead because of our ability to aggregate and then figure out what's going on in the battlefield before they can figure out what we're doing." "So I'm very much in favor of it for moral reasons. But I'm also in favor of it because I don't know how else you explain this to the American people. We're going to take your job, we're going to eviscerate your ability to have money and power, but we're not going to defend you on the battlefield?"

TBPN

57,054 次观看 • 4 个月前