Discussion

• @boazbaraktcs Boaz Barak on x

  Extremely well put @deanwball ! A must read essay. My position is that: 1. Anthropic is a great company, people who work there care deeply about AI safety and the benefit of the U.S. Tagging it as a “supply chain risk” is a massive own-goal to American AI leadership. 2. The

• @lessin @lessin on x

  This is the smartest overall thing. i have read on claude / dow dynamic

• @sammcallister Sam Mcallister on x

  @aidan_mclau @scrollvoid This isn't true. Anthropic hasn't offered a “helpful-only” model without safeguards for NatSec use. Claude Gov is a custom model with extra training, including technical safeguards. (We've also had FDEs and researchers implementing it, and we run our own …

• @danprimack Dan Primack on x

  There is a valid argument for DoD not wanting to work w/ cos that used Claude in products being sold to DoD, given mission disagreement between the company and DoD. There is no good argument for banning Claude use at other, non-national security depts. Beyond spite.

• @liv_boeree Liv Boeree on x

  Fascinating piece from someone close to the DoW/Anthropic skirmish. Worth reading.

• @matthew_meyers5 Matthew Meyers on x

  Many policy failures are downstream from this dynamic [image]

• @_coenen Andy Coenen on x

  This essay perfectly captures why the Anthropic fiasco matters

• @albertwenger Albert Wenger on x

  Eloquent essay on why the bully treatment of @AnthropicAI by the administration is profoundly bad. Everyone in tech should be speaking up.

• @itsurboyevan Evan Armstrong on x

  Excellent—people seem to have forgotten that what makes America great is fundamental rights of speech, private property, and enforcement of contracts. I disagree with Dean on many (most?) AI policies, but without contract law that debate is meaningless.

• @afinetheorem Kevin A. Bryan on x

  Re: DoD-Anthropic craziness & @deanwball's great essay today: let's try a steelman USG defense. You are Canada, or a future D admin in the US. Contract w/ Starlink to handle all govt comms or similar. You worry it is so integrated & important - what if Elon shuts off access? 1/8

• @palmerluckey Palmer Luckey on x

  @AlecStapp This would hit a lot harder if the government had not been doing this for at least a century. The gun industry during the Clinton years is a particularly relevant example.

• @dkthomp Derek Thompson on x

  I continue to think that a useful way to see this administration is a kind of systematic “Control-F: monarchy” search function to discover the tools of authoritarianism embedded in the legal code. The White House keeps finding dormant, esoteric, picayune statutes to justify

• @justinbullock14 Justin Bullock on x

  This week in AI policy, everything is different, and everything is the same. Brilliantly laid out by @deanwball, who has further increased my respect for him the last 5 days. Kudos, sir.

• @tszzl Roon on x

  @QuasLacrimas you can't conflate “the USA gets to decide” with “the pentagon can unilaterally nuke your company”

• @pmarca Marc Andreessen on x

  Overheard in Silicon Valley: “Every single person who was in favor of government control of AI, is now opposed to government control of AI.”

• @tszzl Roon on x

  The machinery of our current republic seems to be in such disrepair that it is hard to see how it lasts. No one knows what comes next, but I strongly suspect that whatever it is will be deeply intertwined with, and enabled by, advanced AI. It is with this that we will rebuild our

• @deanwball Dean W. Ball on x

  @BearForce_Won as someone who has idolized ben since the days of “no, the iPhone is going to be resilient to commodification” (his beginning)—and obviously is operating in ben's shadow as a tech newsletter writer—I was disappointed with his piece today.

• @joannejang Joanne Jang on x

  the most thoughtful & truth-seeking take on this all

• @bearforce_won @bearforce_won on x

  This is excellent, and much less hastily reasoned than this morning's Stratechery piece, which as far as I can tell attempts to make the case that the government can unilaterally destroy private property on the basis of a counterparty's entirely theoretical future threat to its

• @quaslacrimas Tantum on x

  Long term, the most powerful artificial intelligence will also be the most powerful weapon in the world. If you think you're building the most powerful weapon in the United States of America and the USA doesn't get to decide how to use it, you're smoking crack

• @xenoimpulse @xenoimpulse on x

  I suppose I was incorrect in saying that a walkback could alleviate the chilling effects; the chilling effects are here to stay no matter what due to institutional incoherence and disunity. [image]

• @zeffmax Max Zeff on x

  Powerful words from Dean Ball, former White House AI adviser. “That alone should make one thing clear: terms like this are not some ridiculous violation of the norms of defense contracting. Anyone attempting to convince you otherwise is misinformed or lying.”

• @dkthomp Derek Thompson on x

  A quite brilliant essay on AI, the law, and the future of the republic. An upshot: If the US govt can go to any company, demand any contract language, and reserve the right to destroy your company if you have qualms, there is no such thing as private property rights in America.

• @mreflow Matt Wolfe on x

  I know a ton of people have shared this already and you've probably already seen it. But it really is a great read. It's the most clear explanation of what's currently happening with Anthropic vs the DoW, with much more nuance than I'm able to share.

• @gallabytes @gallabytes on x

  very high quality post, an accounting of the true cost of the moment. an interesting question for this time of incredible leverage that I haven't seen enough ink on: what comes after the republic? what should governance even look like at the dawn of superintelligence?

• @minmodulation @minmodulation on x

  lmao well you get what you voted for [image]

• @garymarcus Gary Marcus on x

  “No matter what world we build, the limitations imposed in the law on what we know today as “the government's” use of AI will be of paramount importance. We really do want to ensure that mass surveillance and autonomous weapons/systems of control cannot be used to curtail our

• @presidentlin @presidentlin on x

  Bars. Read to the end. My two favourite paragraphs [image]

• @ericboehm87 Eric Boehm on x

  You really should read @deanwball's latest on the Trump administration's attempted corporate murder of Anthropic... [image]

• @s_oheigeartaigh @s_oheigeartaigh on x

  This is essential reading. It's powerful, emotive, but also has exceptional clarity. This in particular is nail on head - “Even if I am right that we live in the “rapid capabilities growth” world, it will still be the case that the adoption of U.S. AI will be seen as especially

• @mdudas Mike Dudas on x

  incredible piece on @AnthropicAI vs @DeptofWar via @deanwball https://www.hyperdimensional.co/ ... you simply can't pass laws anymore in america, which means regulators, courts and the president run the country [image]

• @zdch Zac Hill on x

  One reason I am a State Capacity Maximalist (and why the work of e.g. @pahlkadot et al at Recoding America is so important to me) is that we just can't function as a Republic when the idea of passing legislation is at best a punchline. GOAT-tier essay from @deanwball today. [imag…

• @eggerdc Andrew Egger on x

  Bracing stuff from @deanwball [image]

• @deredleritt3r Prinz on x

  Self-recommending, and a must-read. I agree with pretty much every word of this.

• @ruark @ruark on x

  “I encourage you to avoid the assumption that “democratic” control—control “of the people, by the people, and for the people”—is synonymous with governmental control. The gap between these loci of control has always existed, but it is ever wider now.” https://www.hyperdimensional…

• @thezvi Zvi Mowshowitz on x

  Now in a Twitter article, so you have no excuse. Read it. My stuff can wait.

• @deanwball Dean W. Ball on x

  Clawed

• @hamandcheese Samuel Hammond on x

  “At some point during my lifetime—I am not sure when—the American republic as we know it began to die.”

• @rcbregman Rutger Bregman on x

  Wow, the lead author of Trump's AI Action Plan, Dean Ball, is calling out Pete Hegseth's mafia-style behavior toward Anthropic: “The fact that his shot is unlikely to be lethal (only very bloody) does not change the message sent to every investor and corporation in America: do [i…

• @deanwball Dean W. Ball on x

  I have, for lack of a better phrase, “action plan mode,” and that part of me wants to be like, “just add a fucking clause to dfars you fools” and then I also have, uh, “macrohistorical literary analysis mode,” and I think this piece probably captures the two wolves pretty well

• @andrewcurran_ Andrew Curran on x

  The old world is ending; more of it burns away every day. Things will never return to the way they were, not in two years, not in five, not ever. We have long since passed the threshold. This is an era of transformative change.

• @alecstapp Alec Stapp on x

  This is not hyperbole, and every business leader in the country needs to recognize the stakes of what's happening: [image]

• @alecstapp Alec Stapp on x

  Really important point here: There were much, much less restrictive means available for the Department of War to achieve its stated ends. Instead, they are attempting to destroy one of our leading AI companies. [image]

• @deanwball Dean W. Ball on x

  I think this one needs no further explanation. [image]

• @timkellogg.me Tim Kellogg on bluesky

  Fascinating article.  It argues that the republic is already dead, and the DoW incident is merely the signal  —  www.hyperdimensional.co/p/clawed [image]

• @moskov.goodventures.org Dustin Moskovitz on bluesky

  “If this event contributed anything, it simply made the ongoing death more obvious and less deniable for me personally.  I consider the events of the last week a kind of death rattle of the old republic, the outward expression of a body that has thrown in the towel.”  —  Don't sk…

• @tcarmody Tim Carmody on bluesky

  The means of production have been replaced by the terms of service.  [embedded post]

• @quastora Trey Causey on x

  @stratechery I believe this post fundamentally misunderstands the options that are / were actually available to the government and to Anthropic in a way that is undemocratic. I highly recommend reading @deanwball's piece on this today for a more accurate picture. https://www.hype…

• @deanwball Dean W. Ball on x

  I don't understand why this is so hard for people. Of course for some it actually isn't and they are just defending “whatever my side does” for all the typical stupid reasons. I am a little disappointed to see who has now fallen into the idiot trap, however.

• @artemisconsort Hunter Ash on x

  People believe in process only and exactly to the extent they believe it will produce their desired outcomes.

• @dan_jeffries1 Daniel Jeffries on x

  Limited government folks have always understood one thing better than everyone else: Your team is not always in charge. Fools imagine their team will be in charge forever and always. So whatever powers you give “the powers that be” get to be used by the other guys later. So

• @beffjezos @beffjezos on x

  EAs are for government control of AIs as long as it's their people in charge We have been calling them out for years and now the mask has come off Self-serving power-seeking disguised as virtue

• @aaronscher Aaron Scher on x

  It continues to be the case that nobody knows how to align a superintelligence. Therefore, no company should be allowed to create such an AI, no government should be allowed to create such an AI. The private sector cannot effectively create such prohibitions—governments could.

• @antoniogm Antonio García Martínez on x

  Yes, but the problem is that the reverse is also true.

• @benspringwater Ben Springwater on x

  I love @benthompson .  He is my favorite tech commentator.  I listen to @stratechery every day.  But his justification for the US Govt seeking to destroy Anthropic is incredibly glib and misguided.  AI ::  nuclear weapons is sometimes a useful analogy but it's obviously an imperf…

• @erikvoorhees Erik Voorhees on x

  If your opinion on this topic depends on who the president is, you are actually the problem.

• @alltheyud Eliezer Yudkowsky on x

  Just to be real clear, I am and have been in favor of international treaties to shut down escalation toward superhuman AI. I am against government control of advanced AI. I am also against private control of advanced AI. It must not be allowed to exist.

• @dkthomp Derek Thompson on x

  Three things that can be true at the same time 1. That this WH has a commendable talent for turning public opinion against its actions. 2. That govt regulation of AI was always going to be a very tricky multi-stage muddle no matter who the president was in 2026. 3. That Pete

• @packym Packy McCormick on x

  Ben Thompson with the best take on DOD v. Anthropic, which is basically: if you don't want the government to treat your technology like nuclear weapons, stop comparing your technology to nuclear weapons. Hype Tax. [image]

• @morallawwithin @morallawwithin on x

  Crazy how the “the government should ban torture” people are in favor of government control of torture, right until the government starts torturing people