United States Corrupt Twattery

[SilverHood]

He didn't ask Denmark, haha. Anyway, the Danish Iver Huitfeldt air defense frigates are not able to take part in missions right now, since their anti air systems don't work.

 

[Overdriven]

So out of all the "Allies" Trump asked to send ships to the Strait of Hormuz

Italy: Rejected
Spain: Rejected
Japan: Rejected
France: Rejected
Norway: Rejected
Canada: Rejected
Australia: Rejected
Germany: Rejected
China: No response
UK: Rejected
Netherlands: No response
South Korea: No response

It's almost as if constantly belittling your allies and starting an illegal war had consequences scratches chin

Lol, US thinking China will go to war/work against against one of their own allies. That's funny.

 

[Scouse]

Also, a recent study shows that Claude was the best-performing AI model when it comes to preventing people from planning to cause harm to themselves or others. No wonder the US admin doesn't want to work with them.

Yes. So why would you let your military spend money on it?

I said it was a bit of a "dick move". And it is. But that's all it is. Woe is the 'poor' one of the richest companies in the world - worth about $380 billion.

The US doesn't want it's military to work with a company that stops it's AI models being used by the military.

Do you and @Gwadien need me to say it's obviously because Trump is a baby rapist or something?

 

[Scouse]

No it doesn't. I can't tell if you are being contrarian for it's own sake or you're just willfully ignorant. It's used to call out companies the country considers an enemy of the state or a nation level security risk. It's a designation intentionally designed to harm Anthropic and its reputation.

I get where you're coming from - and already said it can be fought in the courts.

However consider this - if their AI model is being used to write military code, yet has built-in restrictions on military use, even if nothing malicious is happening that could feasibly and legitimately create a supply chain vulnerability. If Claude is embedded in a workflow that generates, tests, or maintains military code and it refuses certain tasks because of vendor-safety (i.e. Anthropic's admirable principles) then that could easily be seen by the DoD as a denial of service vector.

If the US military depended on Claude for code generation reliability becomes a national security issue. And these are hallucinatory AI models we're talking about here.

According to Anthropic, Claude is explicitly designed to avoid autonomous targetting, weapons development, 'harmful code'. All the stuff the US military wants.

I know we all hate Trump. But really, with your coder head on, do you not see this as a response to the US military saying "disable these safety protocols, or we can't use you". Anthropic telling them to jog on. And the US going - well we simply can't allow your code generation facilities to produce code for US military applications. It's a clear point of operational risk.

Small issue. Multibilliondollar company. Owned by Amazon, Google and a load of Venture Capitalists. Boo, fucking, hoo tbh.

But also - kudos from me. I'm glad there's a company that doesn't want military using it to produce stuff that kills...

 

[Gwadien]

Yes. So why would you let your military spend money on it?

I said it was a bit of a "dick move". And it is. But that's all it is. Woe is the 'poor' one of the richest companies in the world - worth about $380 billion.

The US doesn't want it's military to work with a company that stops it's AI models being used by the military.

Do you and @Gwadien need me to say it's obviously because Trump is a baby rapist or something?

No, the US doesn't want Anthropic to work with any US government department.

and by extension, any contractors etc that deal with the government.

Cuba'd them.

 

[caLLous]

Yes. So why would you let your military spend money on it?

I said it was a bit of a "dick move". And it is. But that's all it is. Woe is the 'poor' one of the richest companies in the world - worth about $380 billion.

The US doesn't want it's military to work with a company that stops it's AI models being used by the military.

Do you and @Gwadien need me to say it's obviously because Trump is a baby rapist or something?

It's not "a bit of a dick move"; it's punitive, spiteful bullshit.

 

[Scouse]

No, the US doesn't want Anthropic to work with any US government department.

The military. They specified the military. They're still running just fine in non military-linked departments, sub-contractors, companies etc. etc.

Amazon, Microsoft, Google have all issued statements that Anthropic - that poor poor company you guys have jumped to the defence of - can continue using Claude for all non-military workloads.

It's not "a bit of a dick move"; it's punitive, spiteful bullshit.

In the not utterly hysterical world the removal of an anti-military AI model from only military programming might not be seen as spiteful, but potentially eminently sensible given the little we know about LLM risks.


I tell you what tho gents, I've a really big mug here, and there's a fucking hell of a squall going on in it. I'm pretty sure I'll find a shipwreck when I get to the bottom of it!

 

[caLLous]

It's not even an "anti-military" model. It was in use by the military but then Hegseth wanted to remove safety mechanisms and they said fuck no. Hegseth went on a massive sulk (presumably thinking the supply chain risk threat would make them bend the knee and show everyone what a fucking legend he is) and suddenly they're a national security risk and nobody is allowed to work with them.

 

[Deebs]

It's not even an "anti-military" model. It was in use by the military but then Hegseth wanted to remove safety mechanisms and they said fuck no. Hegseth went on a massive sulk (presumably thinking the supply chain risk threat would make them bend the knee and show everyone what a fucking legend he is) and suddenly they're a national security risk and nobody is allowed to work with them.

Remind me, Hegseth is that smarmy cunt who does the press briefings?

 

[Gwadien]

Remind me, Hegseth is that smarmy cunt who does the press briefings?

Hes the Lord of War (Secretary of Defence)

 

[Deebs]

Hes the Lord of War (Secretary of Defence)

Yeh it is him and I just googled his name to find his picture and OH WHAT A SURPRISE

Peter Brian Hegseth is an American government official and former television personality

 

[Ormorof]

At least in idiocracy they were trying to find smart people to run things

 

[Raven]

Russia v2.0, from the start.

FCC Chair Brendan Carr threatens to revoke broadcasters' licences over Iran coverage

After Trump criticised media coverage of the Iran war, Carr says he can remove licences if they do not serve the public interest.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Gwadien]

Russia v2.0, from the start.

FCC Chair Brendan Carr threatens to revoke broadcasters' licences over Iran coverage

After Trump criticised media coverage of the Iran war, Carr says he can remove licences if they do not serve the public interest.

www.bbc.co.uk

Dems are the real fascists!

 

[Embattle]

Yeh it is him and I just googled his name to find his picture and OH WHAT A SURPRISE

Fox News.

 

[Scouse]

Dems are the real fascists!

They're all the same. There's been comeback has been from republicans too.

At least they're not on record like Hillary having a pop at the First Amendment prohibiting the Dem's desires to censor certain types of speech - she even took a shot at the founding fathers.

 

[Scouse]

I notice I've picked up a couple of badges of "lol! I'm not engaging" from @caLLous and @Ormorof here.

The Democrats were in power, Hillary was specifically talking about speech laws in Europe, and lamented the fact that the First Amendment laws in the US stopped them acting in the same way that Europe does - and said something along the lines that the Founding Fathers "couldn't have envisaged" the situations that they wanted to legislate for.

That's not the head of the FCC bandying around threats regarding licences. That's a direct attack on the Constitution by an ex First Lady.


The level of seriousness of the threat is an order of magnitude higher. But rabid people won't look at that.

 

[Scouse]

Meanwhile, something actually important:

Trump counter-terrorism chief quits over Iran war, blaming Israel

Joe Kent resigned as national counter-terrorism center director, saying Iran posed no imminent threat to the US

www.theguardian.com

I cannot in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran ... Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation, and it is clear that we started this war due to pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby.

Republican of conscience?

But possibly a racist asshat.

 

[Raven]

Honestly, at this point it's worth just trolling the fuck out of the bright orange balloon knot, by everyone. This was a gamble that has blown up in his face, to distract from the fact that he is a child rapist.

It isn't going to work, and it may end up bringing him down.

The sooner he is got rid of, one way or another, the sooner the US can try "normality" for a bit. I hope he dies in the same cell as Epstein, wallowing in a pool of his own piss and shit, rather than getting bumped off.

 

[Ormorof]

Sorry Scouse but that was such a predictable post I could not help myself

 

[Deebs]

Honestly, at this point it's worth just trolling the fuck out of the bright orange balloon knot, by everyone. This was a gamble that has blown up in his face, to distract from the fact that he is a child rapist.

It isn't going to work, and it may end up bringing him down.

The sooner he is got rid of, one way or another, the sooner the US can try "normality" for a bit. I hope he dies in the same cell as Epstein, wallowing in a pool of his own piss and shit, rather than getting bumped off.

Just want to check something @Raven, you haven't stubbed a toe or something?

 

[Raven]

Just want to check something @Raven, you haven't stubbed a toe or something?

Actually, I did this morning! wanker cat A decided to walk in front of my while I was on my journey for a piss at 3am.

 

[Deebs]

Actually, I did this morning! wanker cat A decided to walk in front of my while I was on my journey for a piss at 3am.

I knew there was something afoot.

 

[Scouse]

Sorry Scouse but that was such a predictable post I could not help myself

Respond to the content. She said that.

You can piss and moan about the head of the FCC, but you don't want to look at an actual constitutional threat?

And not from a nobody - an ex president's wife, and someone who could quite easily have been president herself?


I correct myself. They're not all the same. The democrats are a threat to freedom of speech. They're like a European government in waiting.

 

[caLLous]

Respond to the content. She said that.

You can piss and moan about the head of the FCC, but you don't want to look at an actual constitutional threat?

And not from a nobody - an ex president's wife, and someone who could quite easily have been president herself?


I correct myself. They're not all the same. The democrats are a threat to freedom of speech. They're like a European government in waiting.

Except she wasn't the president and "the Democrats were in power" is totally irrelevant - it was the dying embers of the Biden admin when she said it and she hadn't been in government since Obama. She said what she said in an interview a decade after she left the government and over 2 decades after her hubby was the president so... who cares? In terms of her ability to do anything about it, it's as much of a constitutional threat as any other ex-politician saying it.

I'll take the current head of the FCC, working for the current government, telling broadcasters to report the news how the government tells them to or else they'll be taken off the air (along with all the other bullshit the current government is pulling) as being more serious right now than something someone said in a private capacity in an interview in the context of tackling misinformation online and on social media (which is what she said the Founders couldn't have envisioned).

Apart from repeatedly stamping your feet and saying "mmuhhhhh the left are just as bad" where's the comparison in terms of the threat both pose right now?

 

[DaGaffer]

Respond to the content. She said that.

Who cares?

1. Having a pop at the Founding Fathers? Who cares?

2. Pointing out free speech isn't absolute. I agree with her and free speech absolutists are simpletons.

3. If she had tried to do something about it, she'd have done it through a constitutional amendment and the actual process of legislation, and probably failed, Meanwhile Trump simply circumvents the Constitution by capturing SCOTUS and the regulators and bypassing Congress altogether.

There isn't a comparison between Hilary Clinton expressing a political viewpoint and Trump bending the law to his will, and it's asinine to claim otherwise.

 

[Scouse]

2. Pointing out free speech isn't absolute. I agree with her and free speech absolutists are simpletons.

Showing your colours. At least someone's got the balls to, and I thought it might be you.

You're wrong, of course. The only way it can work is as a principle. A horribly messy unnassailable principle. But you absolutely sit with the majority of the human race.

Meanwhile, we're still locking people up for peacefully holding up signs. If Clinton had her way, America would be doing the same.

Trump will be out on his ear at some point. He's not a forever blight. And the constitution will still afford the protections to the people from it's government that it was designed to do.

 

[Scouse]

Terrorism arrests rose 1,114% last year - so why aren’t the security services more alarmed? | Zoe Williams

Due to an ongoing judicial review, Home Office data currently leaves out the thousands of people apprehended at Palestine Action protests. But whichever way you cut it, the number of arrests is outrageous, writes Zoe Williams

www.theguardian.com

Number of terrorism arrests in Blighty up 1,114%.

It's not glib. It's not fantasy land 'what if' thinking. This forum full of wannabe democrat voters is looking over the pond for outrage, rather than right here.