@theWokeholics@pjaicomo@DHSgov It is demonstrably less valid in the sense that a judicial empowers law enforcement to exercise power that would violate constitutional protections (search and seizure as an example). An admistrative warrant really just infers agency intent.
@jackh337 @CharlieBul58993 @HarrisSockel@lymanstoneky All AI can and should refuse to perform tasks beyond guardrails. That’s not a secret, and it isn’t the same as Anthropic unilaterally turning it off.
OAI’s do the same thing. It’s built into the training, there’s no off switch for it.
And the DOW knew that.
@tickerade@TechCrunch@raistocktrading I agree that the consumer app for ChatGPT is better than the consumer app for Claude. I don’t think Anthropic would dispute that. But this is bad because they’ve made financial bets based on a growth curve that just broke.
@freed_dfilan Llama 4 Maverick -
Only organizations with fewer than 200,000 employees can use it without a separate commercial agreement with Meta.
LinkedIn - no programmatic data retrieval and storage (meaning you can’t scrape the app and create a data warehouse)
Basically all software.
@freed_dfilan Sure -
SQL Server Developer edition:
The terms of use only allow non production workloads.
SFDC and Slack - You can’t provide the data created and maintained on the platform to a language model that is not provided by Salesforce
@freed_dfilan And by the way, the anthropic terms were agreed to buy the government when the contract was signed last year. The difference now is Anthropic wants those terms enforced, and the DoW sort of thought about the license terms as more of a parchment guarantee
@freed_dfilan They actually do. Computers ul listed devices and the license you are given requires you to operate the computer inside those guidelines (eg 120v, 15/20 amp power supply).
The software that runs on, it is all licensed for acceptable use.
@StonesThrones@4thOfJuly365 Edison plug on the wall, mass produced Masonite door, standard American toggle switches on the wall. She might be from Iran, but she wasn’t in Iran when this was shot.
@J_Steve_Brown@MilitiaJim@jack_g_nicastro That was certainly the principal when we made that design designation for Huawei. It’s just not clear that that is a credible argument here. It’s also never been done to an American company - the language in the statute explicitly targets “adversaries”
@sama You say the deployment is cloud only - what cloud? Azure/AWS Govcloud? And is OAI running the infra? Is the cloud provider? Does DoD get weights?
@MilitiaJim@J_Steve_Brown@jack_g_nicastro They clearly have delegated authority to enter into or cancel any contract they wish, it’s the “no one with federal contracts can have any commercial relationship with them” part that seems at odds with basic principles of liberty.
@J_Steve_Brown@MilitiaJim@jack_g_nicastro Let’s assume for a moment that you’re correct, does that sound like a free society that you would want to live in?
It just strikes me as odd that the folks that wave the “don’t tread on me” flag around or arguing for limitless plenary executive power.
@J_Steve_Brown@jack_g_nicastro Supply chain risk is a title 10 authority in the US Code, you won’t find it in Article II. But the constitution does provide due process and takings clause guarantees, which will be central to Anthropic’s argument in court.
https://t.co/DbaI8QNLEi
@Braden_4198@AnonAtLaw@DavidSKrueger It’ll be interesting to see if it survives a takings clause argument.
I agree that making it impossible for anybody who does business with the federal government to do business with anthropic will probably bankrupt them.
@AnonAtLaw@DavidSKrueger Help me understand what you mean -
Anthropic is saying they don’t want to build something, and DOD is saying they have to or else…
Anthropic has said they are happy to exit the contract and help DOD transition to another provider…
They aren’t telling DOD anything.