These tough guy right-wing pundits have the same emotional dysregulation issues as the most frantic Trans activists. Always with the knee-jerk cognitive distortions: the constant melodramatic catastrophizing, the whiny performative bellyaching at the slightest perceived adversity.
Who is he claiming "did this to us"? Wouldn't the chief culprit have to be... Donald Trump? Because he's the one who appointed the Supreme Court Justice these guys are now in a frothing apocalyptic rage over -- after previously being good little GOP soldiers and championing her Bold Conservative Warrior credentials when it was time to fast-track her nomination: https://t.co/8d733GNjXx
And oh by the way, "birthright citizenship" was the law of the land all throughout your prior 40 years in America. Today's ruling simply affirmed the status quo. (There's no way you even read it.) You guys just constantly need America to be teetering on the edge of some imagined dystopic destruction, even when the political faction you spend your whole lives agitating to empower controls all three branches of government.
@LJS527 Man, what the actual fuck is happening in, or to, America right now?
People like Chris Rufo and his followers callously celebrating the death of poor people around the world, and now this?
JAMES LINDSAY IS THE VOICE OF REASON??
@KonstantinKisin@jessesingal Unless you perceive yourself as the one harmed, eh?
Why should your tax dollars go towards preventing human death and suffering in exchange for such pittances as soft power and global influence.
Much better put $5 in your pocket and let the wretches die.
@C_Kavanagh If you're going to remove funding, and the cost is human lives - you would think it's ok for at least a cursory discussion to take place.
Tribal ghoulism is revolting.
Not to mention how effective every dollar spent towards American soft power is/was.
@JamesSurowiecki In a just world, not one of these sycophants would be employable post-Trump, because who could ever trust a word coming out of their mouths.
Bloomberg has published the MoU.
Now we know why they did not want to release the text…
There are zero substantive enforceable commitments from the Islamic Republic in this document.
https://t.co/FjMWwXUKUj
@andrewmccalip Opus 4.8 -> cross check your output with codex running gpt 5.5 high/extra.
So create a plan, or file a PR, then send it over to gpt to sign off.
I do this for all critical architecture decisions, and it's significantly better than anything either model can do independently.
Precisely as I predicted, the recent cyber EO, which admin officials insisted was not a licensing regime, ends up in practice being a licensing regime. Forget “voluntary,” forget “permissionless.”
AI is licensed now, but the requirements change constantly and are always a secret, even to the administration itself, which will discover the rules spontaneously in real time as it reacts to events. This means also that the rules are in practice stricter and more roughly enforced for organizations the administration does not like.
Can you blame Anthropic for making itself so disliked? In a sense, sure. The problem is that this childish “he said, she said” is all we have to go on in our analysis of the situation. And because there is no transparency (it is all calls and texts between “White House officials” and “Anthropic executives”), in practice it comes down to who you trust more.
This is why we create laws! To abstract away from personal power struggles and grudges, to submit to the steady application of rules so that complex human activity can unfold with predictability.
The rule of law has been being eroded in the U.S. for my entire life, but it is especially acute in AI because of both the lack of much preexisting law to serve as bulwark, and because of this admin’s insistence that it is Not Regulating AI. This has become an excuse for vagueness and evasiveness in rule-drafting (see the cyber EO), and this in turn makes the lawlessness worse.
The government wants to apply its force to frontier AI, that much is clear. It wants to make the industry submit. And in service of that goal, it has discovered that “not regulating AI” is in fact a great excuse for refusing to support laws that could constrain the admin’s exercise of power. In other words, “not regulating AI” is a *justification* for the tyrannical control of AI by the state.
This should alarm you regardless of what party you are in. What you are seeing now will be used against you one day soon, if not by this admin then by its successors. This is the antithesis of the rule of law.
The administration cannot and will not fix this problem alone. We need Congress to step in and impose rules on this mess.