Discussion

• @krustelkram Céline Keller on x

  Just remembered this little bit of history about “the good guys” from Anthropic [image]

• @loomdoop Y Disassembler on x

  This is Anthropic. They also have whole team of lobbyists focused on taking over every aspect of civil government at local, state, and federal levels. [image]

• @theatlantic @theatlantic on x

  The deal between the Pentagon and Anthropic fractured in part over the proposed use of autonomous weapons. @andersen on the question OpenAI staff should now be asking Sam Altman about his company's new deal with the Pentagon: https://www.theatlantic.com/ ...

• @uswremichael @uswremichael on x

  As usual, more lies from @DarioAmodei.  @AnthropicAI wanted language that would prevent all @DeptofWar employees from doing a LinkedIn search!  Then, they wanted to stop DoW from using any *PUBLIC* database that would enable us to, eg., recruit military services members or hire n…

• @zeffmax Max Zeff on x

  The Atlantic reports that the Pentagon wanted to use Anthropic's AI for some type of surveillance of Americans. Given the ways some companies are already using AI today to surveil their own employees's emails, chats, etc., I find this kind of use to be particularly disturbing [im…

• @joyoftech @joyoftech on bluesky

  Claude VS the Department of War www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/ jo...  [image]

• @wikisteff @wikisteff on bluesky

  Yeah man.  They have too much data and no way to weaponize it.  This is exactly the same playbook as Bannon 2014 and his “incel army” of motherfuckers to take apart the US from the inside out.  —  Now they need to get you to vote Republican.  [embedded post]

• @mikeriverso Mike Riverso on bluesky

  The thing that gets me is that you don't even need an LLM to do this.  You can in fact do it better with a database and actual statistical analysis.  [embedded post]

• @jmberger.com J.M. Berger on bluesky

  No universe in which it's appropriate for the Pentagon to be collecting this information about Americans [embedded post]

• @masnick.com Mike Masnick on bluesky

  Reading this, again, you get the sense that someone at Anthropic knows how the intel community misleads by using definitions of words that are different than everyone else believes.  And the people at OpenAI simply don't know or don't care about that.  [embedded post]

• @fbajak Frank Bajak on bluesky

  Best most detailed technical explanation I've seen so dar on the Anthropic-Hegseth dispute over military AI use - based on a source granted anonymity.  [embedded post]

• @hlahmann Henning Lahmann on bluesky

  If this tired narrative of “this is bad mainly because it would affect american citizens” and the obvious implication of what would therefore *not* be objectionable doesn't make you want to burn the entire AI security industry to the ground then honestly idk what's the matter wit…

• @davidryanmiller.com David Ryan Miller on bluesky

  Why does the Department of Defense want to analyze bulk data collected about Americans......................? [embedded post]

• @joeuchill Joe Uchill on bluesky

  Something to think about while lawmakers complain they shouldn't be subject to subpoenas.  [embedded post]

• @johnpanzer.com John Panzer on bluesky

  The PENTAGON wants to analyze bulk data about Americans?  —  Is there any way this is not wildly illegal? [embedded post]

• @chathamharrison @chathamharrison on bluesky

  Sure is weird that Sam Altman thinks this is a great idea as long as he's the one doing it [embedded post]

• @tonystark Tony Stark on bluesky

  Hooo boy.  There we go.  It was about domestic surveillance after all.  [embedded post]

• @stahl @stahl on bluesky

  It's so cool that no one is even bothering to be mad about the government analyzing"bulk data collected about Americans" they're just arguing about which tool they're gonna use to do it [embedded post]

• @damonberes.com Damon Beres on bluesky

  New details on the dispute between the Pentagon and Anthropic; how the negotiations broke down, and a particular sticking point on AI in the cloud vs inside of edge systems. by @rossandersen.bsky.social / tip @techmeme.com

• r/neoliberal r on reddit

  Inside Anthropic's Killer-Robot Dispute With the Pentagon

• r/technology r on reddit

  Inside Anthropic's Killer-Robot Dispute With the Pentagon |  New details on precisely where the lines were drawn

• @nktpnd Ankit Panda on bluesky

  “...the Pentagon wanted the company to allow for the collection and analysis of unclassified, commercial bulk data on Americans, such as geolocation and web browsing data, people briefed on the negotiations said” www.nytimes.com/2026/03/01/t...

• @benjaminjriley Benjamin Riley on bluesky

  It's hard not to read this story and conclude that every single person and entity involved is moronic.  The US government is in the hands of facist morons, and the Big Tech companies producing AI tools are led by delusional or self-serving morons.  —  We are in a very dangerous p…

• @druce.ai @druce.ai on bluesky

  Negotiations over a roughly $200 million Pentagon AI contract collapsed after Secretary Pete Hegseth labeled Anthropic a supply chain risk; OpenAI secured a competing framework deal the same night and Anthropic said it would sue.

• @sheeraf Sheera Frenkel on bluesky

  We have some new details on this in our story: www.nytimes.com/2026/03/01/t...

• @sama Sam Altman on x

  @Austen @wholemars No, we had some different ones. But our terms would now be available to them (and others) if they wanted.

• @sama Sam Altman on x

  Enforcing the SCR designation on Anthropic would be very bad for our industry and our country, and obviously their company. ...  I feel competitive with Anthropic for sure, but successfully building safe superintelligence and widely sharing the benefits is way more important that…

• @sama Sam Altman on x

  @apples_jimmy It was definitely rushed, and the optics don't look good. We really wanted to de-escalate things, and we thought the deal on offer was good. If we are right and this does lead to a de-escalation between the DoW and the industry, we will look like geniuses, and a com…

• @nateberkopec Nate Berkopec on x

  Sam would do good to remember that Hegseth thinks it's sedition when Sen Mark Kelly says “don't follow illegal orders.” Saying that your models will only be used to follow legal orders is the barest of fig leaves in the current administration.

• @xw33bttv Lex on x

  The absolute destruction of an industry first-mover in less than a year is unprecedented. It shouldn't be this easy to solely blame Sama... and yet, behind every blatant lie and poorly thought-out detrimental change sits his decision. Its tragic when you really think about it.

• @sama Sam Altman on x

  @gmiller I have never known how to put an exact number on p(doom), to say nothing of how to think about the differential. I will say this: if I thought going to work every day made it less likely that we all continue to thrive into the future, I would retire and just hang with my…

• @sama Sam Altman on x

  @AlexCVJ I value my liberty and safety, and yours. I believe that strong democracy, and a strong US in particular, is a very good thing for the world. The 16 year old me thought every country should just abolish their defense department at the same time. I wish he were right, but…

• @sama Sam Altman on x

  @DouthatNYT Yes; I think it is an extremely scary precedent and I wish they handled it a different way. I don't think Anthropic handled it well either, but as the more powerful party, I hold the government more responsible. I am still hopeful for a much better resolution.

• @sama Sam Altman on x

  @captgouda24 I don't think this will happen. But of course if we are confident it's unconstitutional, we wouldn't follow it. The constitution is more important than any job, or staying out of jail, or whatever. In my experience, the people in our military are far more committed t…

• @alexcvj @alexcvj on x

  @sama How did you go from “a tool for the betterment of the human race” to “let's work with the department of WAR”?

• @peterwildeford Peter Wildeford on x

  OpenAI is trying to claim simultaneously that (a) their contract with the Pentagon allows for “all lawful purposes” and (b) also that their red lines are fully protected. The way OpenAI bridges this is by saying the protections live in this “deployment architecture and safety

• @sama Sam Altman on x

  @peterwildeford We deliver a system (including choosing what models to deploy), and they can use it bound by lawful ways, including laws and directives around autonomous weapons and surveillance. But we get to decide what system to build, and the DoW understands that there are lo…

• @tyler_m_john Tyler John on x

  @sama Which of the following is true? a) the contract permits all lawful use, + therefore mass surveillance + autonomous weapons, which have no legal prohibition b) the contract has substantive red lines that constrain lawful use c) OpenAI has a controversial interpretation of th…

• @provisionalidea James Rosen-Birch on x

  In the farce of a thread, Sam finally and most clearly admits the only bounds on DoW are whatever they deem legal (which anyone who read the contract text already knew).

• @gmiller Geoffrey Miller on x

  @sama I'll ask the key question, since nobody else will: In your quest to build Artificial Superintelligence, what's the maximum p(doom) you're willing to impose on all of our kids, without our consent?

• @sama Sam Altman on x

  @captgouda24 We would not do that, because it violates the constitution. Also, I cannot overstate how much the DoW has been extremely aligned on this point. However, maybe this is the question you are really asking: what would we do if there were a constitutional amendment that m…

• @sama Sam Altman on x

  @mreiffy @Jack_Raines The main reason for the rush was an attempt to de-escalate matters at a time when it felt like things could get extremely hot. I am confident in our team's ability to build a safe system with all of their tools—including policy and legal matters, but also ma…

• @sama Sam Altman on x

  @viralmuskmelon This is a complicated one we struggled with a lot, and until recently it was easier for us to just not have to think about it much and let other companies figure it out. We decided we will work with other allied nations, and we think a balance of power in the worl…

• @sama Sam Altman on x

  @mcbyrne Yes, we will turn it off in that very unlikely event, but we believe the U.S. government is an institution that does its best to follow law and policy. What we won't do is turn it off because we disagree with a particular (legal military) decision. We trust their authori…

• @mcbyrne @mcbyrne on x

  @sama Will you turn off the tool if they violate the rules?

• @sama Sam Altman on x

  @gothburz We will deploy FDEs, and have cleared researchers.

• @captgouda24 Nicholas Decker on x

  @sama If the DoW gives you what you believe to be an unconstitutional order, do you refuse to follow it until the courts rule? Or do you do it until the courts bar it?

• @valhalla_dev @valhalla_dev on x

  Oh come tf on dude this is the dumbest PR larp of all time who is falling for this [image]

• @jeremymstamper Jeremy Stamper on x

  @sama What would happen if you called it the DoD? I'm not suggesting you do that but I'm curious what would happen if.

• @viralmuskmelon @viralmuskmelon on x

  @sama @sama Sam, with OpenAI now powering classified military ops, how do you square that with your original mission to benefit all of humanity—not just one side in global conflicts? Genuine ask

• @gothburz Peter Girnus on x

  @sama On classified networks, your engineers won't have clearance to monitor how the model is used. Your safeguards are contractual, not architectural. How do you enforce a red line you can't see being crossed?

• @apples_jimmy @apples_jimmy on x

  @sama Why the rush to sign the deal ? Obviously the optics don't look great

• @mreiffy @mreiffy on x

  @sama @Jack_Raines Why move forward with the DoW agreement now, after months of more cautious talks, and how confident are you that the technical / policy safeguards will hold up in a real high stakes military setting?

• @captgouda24 Nicholas Decker on x

  @sama If the government comes back with a memo saying that, in their view, mass domestic surveillance is legal, do you do that? Do you do it until the courts bar it, or do you delay until the courts approve it? Second, would mass domestic surveillance be a lawful use right now?

• @sama Sam Altman on x

  @chatgpt21 I can't speak for them, but to speculate with the best understanding of the situation. *First, I saw reporting that they were extremely close on a deal, and for much of the time both sides really wanted to reach one. I have seen what happens in tense negotiations when …

• @chatgpt21 Chris on x

  @sama What was the core difference why you think the DoW accepted OpenAI but not Anthropic

• @douthatnyt Ross Douthat on x

  @sama Does the precedent that the DoW is setting by effectively blacklisting Anthropic make you concerned about what any future dispute with the Pentagon would mean for your own company's independence and viability?

• @sama Sam Altman on x

  For a long time, we were planning to non-classified work only.  We thought the DoW clearly needed an AI partner, and doing classified work is clearly much more complex.  We have said no to previous deals in classified settings that Anthropic took.  We started talking with the DoW…

• @sama Sam Altman on x

  @tszzl Yes, I am. If we have to take on that fight we will, but it clearly exposes us to some risk. I am still very hopeful this is going to get resolved, and part of why we wanted to act fast was to help increase the chances of that.

• @mattyglesias Matthew Yglesias on x

  @sama 1. What kind of implicit or explicit threats did you receive from DOW before striking the deal? 2. If you received such threats, would you disclose them in public during a Twitter AMA? 3. If the answer to (2) is “no” (which of course it is) what's the point of this?

• @theo @theo on x

  @sama How long has this conversation with DoW been going for? What was the reason for announcing so close to the deadline they gave Anthropic?

• @sama Sam Altman on x

  @mattyglesias 1. No explicit or implicit threats. In fact, I could tell that as of Weds, the DoW was genuinely surprised we were willing to consider. 2. I think I would, and it would be lost in the noise of the SCR stuff.

• @tszzl Roon on x

  @sama are you worried at all about the potential for things to go really south during a possible dispute over what's legal or not later on and be deemed a supply chain risk? I find this part to be the most worrying out of distribution thing to happen this past week

• @sama Sam Altman on x

  Sam Altman says OpenAI reached an agreement with the DOD to deploy its models in DOD's classified network and asks DOD to extend those terms to all AI companies

• @openai @openai on x

  OpenAI says it does not think Anthropic should be designated as a supply chain risk and it has made its position on this clear to the Pentagon

• @jenzhuscott Jen Zhu on x

  Worth a read - •Ex-OpenAI geopolitics lead: frontier AI labs' military policies r deliberately vague & changeable to preserve “optionality” •Anthropic's DoD standoff isn't the ethical win as portrayed. Dario is hardly a white knight - he's open to fully autonomous weapons if

• @zeffmax Max Zeff on x

  I think this is the clearest eyed take I've read about what's happened between the AI industry and the Pentagon in the last 72 hours, with a chilling warning at the end. “The biggest losers in all of this are everyday people and civilians in conflict zones.”

• @foomagemindset Kass Popper on x

  OpenAI's models can't be used to control drone swarms. Except they already are, as detailed in this post on the military use policies of AI companies. [image]

• @sarahshoker Sarah Shoker on x

  I used to lead the Geopolitics Team at OpenAI. Today I published a few observations on frontier AI companies and their military usage policies from my perspective as a former employee and researcher active in the int'l security space. (Link below.) [image]

• @sarahshoker Sarah Shoker on x

  My ask is pretty simple: Don't exploit ambiguous language to appease the public and your employees. (If the reaction on X is anything to go by, it's not working anyway.) https://sarahshoker.substack.com/ ...

• @tcarmody Tim Carmody on bluesky

  Good read from a former OpenAI geopolitics person [embedded post]

• @zeffmax Max Zeff on x

  Besides the fact that Emil deleted a version of this tweet criticizing Anthropic for training AI on copyrighted works, I am fascinated to learn the other ways the DoW uses AI to analyze social media posts. This also doesn't specifically refute the Atlantic's report?

• @zyeine_art @zyeine_art on x

  This is the damn Under Secretary of War for the United States, why does it read like a man shouting at a pigeon in a carpark? (I'm in the UK, we don't have Wendy's but if we did, Sir.. this isn't one.) Perhaps it's unreasonable of me to expect the Under Secretary of WAR to

• @dantalks1 @dantalks1 on x

  They're going to twist Dario's nipples at Anthropic until he squeals like a girl and surrenders to them.

• @heidykhlaaf Dr Heidy Khlaaf on x

  From our “Mind the Gap” paper 2024, a snippet I have come back to what seems like dozens of time at this point. [image]

• @beffjezos @beffjezos on x

  The saga continues. Interesting rebuttal from DoW Chief

• @tysonbrody Tyson Brody on x

  He's calling Dario a liar, but this reads like official confirmation by the Pentagon that they wanted to use Claude to analyze “publicly available information,” which is the legal term used for all bulk data purchase from brokers.

• @tyler_m_john Tyler John on x

  One of the odd things about the whole Anthropic DoW thing is Anthropic getting framed as trying to control the military when the whole point of rejecting autonomous killings is that they do not want Claude to be in control of killing, they want military staff to stay in control

• @andy_timm Andy Timm on x

  My working assumption though, is that the game here is disassembling around the definition of mass domestic surveillance (which I would consider this to be!) https://www.theatlantic.com/ ...

• @uswremichael @uswremichael on x

  As usual, more lies from @DarioAmodei. @AnthropicAI wanted language that would prevent all @DeptofWar employees from doing a LinkedIn search! Then, they wanted to stop DoW from using any *PUBLIC* database that would enable us to, eg., recruit military services members or hire

• @tysonbrody Tyson Brody on x

  The Atlantic is reporting that Anthropic was told the Defense Department wanted to use clause to “analyze bulk data collected from Americans.” Did we know about an ongoing pentagon data harvesting program targeting citizens? Is this news???? [image]

• @emeriticus Pedro L. Gonzalez on x

  This is what Palmer Luckey, Andreessen goons, Musk, and the rest were defending: strong arming Anthropic into allowing the government to use its tech to surveil and control Americans in a truly Orwellian fashion. These people are the genuine enemies of America and civilization.

• @deanwball Dean W. Ball on x

  This is quite a departure from the President's stated positions on AI and copyright: “there has been no bigger thief of American's public identity information en masse or creators' works than by Anthropic”

• @thezvi Zvi Mowshowitz on x

  You know you're on tilt when you have to take down your post because you went directly against the White House on copyright, and this is the SECOND, FIXED version. My lord. [image]

• @isaiah_bb Isi Breen on x

  Anthropic also announced the Pentagon is using its products for things like “target selection” and it's like everyone already knew that was happening? What the hell!

• @andy_timm Andy Timm on x

  If this Atlantic source on Anthropic/DoW negotiations is substantially correct, then OpenAI has a lot of evil/dishonesty to answer for. If there are actually binding, hard lines drawn to prevent this, folks like @boazbaraktcs and @natseckatrina should share them. [image]

• @krishnanrohit Rohit on x

  As an exercise in critical thinking I wish anthropic and openai would swap their names for a week. A sort of forced post hoc intellectual turing test for every take.

• @adamscochran Adam Cochran on x

  Well there is part of what the DoD Anthropic was about. Based on the contract language around analyzing bulk commercial data and deanonymizing it matches with this data discussion: Since 2021 the Pentagons DIA has been purchasing anonymized and harvested geolocation data that's

• @tysonbrody Tyson Brody on x

  Ok yeah this is a coordinated media push from Anthropic, the NYT is reporting the Pentagon specifically requested to use Claude to analyze “unclassified, commercial bulk data on Americans, such as geolocation and web browsing data” [image]

• @mikeelgan Mike Elgan on x

  Word of the moment: “loopholey” https://www.theatlantic.com/ ...

• @hshaban Hamza Shaban on x

  The reason the Pentagon ended talks with Anthropic, creating an opening for OpenAI, was Anthropic's refusal to allow its tech to be used on unclassified, commercial bulk data on Americans, like geolocation and web browsing data, the Atlantic reports: [image]

• @ednewtonrex Ed Newton-Rex on x

  The US' ‘Under Secretary of War’ just admitted he thinks AI companies are stealing creators' work to build their models. He said: “There has been no bigger thief of [...] creators' works than by Anthropic (search for the lawsuits).” Shortly after he said this and AI Czar David [i…

• @nxthompson @nxthompson on x

  The fight between Anthropic and Pentagon over mass surveillance matters more than most people think. 1) the data we share with AI models is insanely personal 2) the ability of AI models to de-anonymize, and find patterns across platforms, is profound. https://www.theatlantic.com/…

• @sama Sam Altman on x

  [Thread] In an AMA, Sam Altman says DOD blacklisting Anthropic sets an “extremely scary precedent”, OpenAI rushed its deal to “de-escalate things”, and more

• @hausfath Zeke Hausfather on x

  Hmm... https://www.nytimes.com/... [image]

• @editorialiste Andrew Nusca on x

  “In the end, the talks ... were undone by weeks of building frustration between men who had differing philosophies ... and who did not like one another.” https://www.nytimes.com/...

• @sigalsamuel Sigal Samuel on x

  Important new reporting suggests Anthropic was actually super close to inking a deal with the Pentagon https://www.nytimes.com/... [image]

• @danprimack Dan Primack on x

  “OpenAI's new deal with the Pentagon does not explicitly prohibit the collection of Americans' publicly available information — a sticking point that rival Anthropic says is crucial for ensuring domestic mass surveillance doesn't take place.” https://www.axios.com/...

• @aaronbergman18 Aaron Bergman on x

  Our culture and expectations and norms around this stuff are hardly built for 2000 let alone 2026

• @yashalevine Yasha Levine on x

  they have been doing this shit since day one — since that data was available for purchase.

• @jdcmedlock James Medlock on x

  So we should probably pass some laws on this stuff...

• @tysonbrody Tyson Brody on x

  In 2021 the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency told Senator Wyden it was purchasing geolocation data from commercial brokers harvested from cell phones and that it did not believe it needed a warrant to analyze American's data. This has to be part of what freaked Dario out. […

• @krishnanrohit Rohit on x

  If the DoD buying commercially available data is obviously not okay we should ask what commercially available means, and the anti argument has to be there should be a law against collecting the data because of modern tech, otherwise this is just mood affiliated misdirection.

• @alexlmiller Alex Miller on x

  There's a lot the government does that is “legal” but you may not want to be a part of

• @ramez Ramez Naam on x

  Coming back to this. No AI company can stop DOD from misusing AI, because it's simply too easy to pick up or buy a different model. But by making the issue public, Dario has called the attention of voters, the press, and Congress to the potential misuse of AI. That's the win.

• @ramez Ramez Naam on x

  The most important thing Dario did is get this issue in the news. At the end of the day, xAI will build a good enough model. Or Palantir can build a frontier model for a few hundred million. There are no technical moats here. The important thing is that the public and Congress

• @secwar @secwar on x

  Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth directs the DOD to designate Anthropic as a supply chain risk, barring military contractors from doing business with the company

• @taylorlorenz Taylor Lorenz on x

  And someone was just claiming this entire thing wasn't related to laws like KOSA yesterday. We need the left to wake tf up and start fighting these mass surveillance laws being pushed under the guise of child safety asap

• @aclu.org @aclu.org on bluesky

  The Department of Defense is buying up our data and seeking to use powerful AI systems to amass information about our private lives without a warrant.  —  That's the definition of Big Brother surveillance, and it's unconstitutional.