Pentagon deal sparks protest outside of OpenAI HQ in San Francisco

[Anomalism]

So, if you’ve already supplies a link that shows that the contract provision was for Americans, it doesn’t seem unfair to ask “which one?”

Or, instead of running away, maybe you could find your nadz and just answer the question.

And for “making up my mind,” you’re wrong. I’m asking questions to determine if you’re making some sense or none.

I'm not going to convince a partisan of anything they don't want to believe. I'm very thankful that people link ding have the aptitude to actually engage with information.

My hope is that those that actually think can create bipartisan support against things like this.

Have a nice day.

 

[BackAgain]

Ok, I never said you did. I asked the question. And no, I don't think under any conditions we should have that technology deployed. Once the genie is out of the bottle, there's no putting it back into the bottle.

I don’t agree.

I mean, yeah. Some things can’t be put back in the bottle. Like, using nuclear technology to make catastrophic weapons.

If the tech is already out of the bottle, then what is it exactly that anomalisisisism ranting about?

 

[BackAgain]

I'm not going to convince a partisan of anything they don't want to believe. I'm very thankful that people link ding have the aptitude to actually engage with information.

My hope is that those that actually think can create bipartisan support against things like this.

Have a nice day.

You’re fully predictable. A couple of hard questions exposes you as the fraud you are.

It’s ok. It is funny and it is pathetic, but you choosing to run away was easily predicted. I mean, damn! You’re a strange little child.

 

[ding]

I don’t agree.

I mean, yeah. Some things can’t be put back in the bottle. Like, using nuclear technology to make catastrophic weapons.

If the tech is already out of the bottle, then what is it exactly that anomalisisisism ranting about?

Deploying it without human safeguards.

 

[ding]

I don’t agree.

Apparently you have more faith in government than I do.

 

[Anomalism]

You’re fully predictable. A couple of hard questions exposes you as the fraud you are.

It’s ok. It is funny and it is pathetic, but you choosing to run away was easily predicted. I mean, damn! You’re a strange little child.

That's nice champ. Enjoy your victory lap.

 

[Anomalism]

Apparently you have more faith in government than I do.

Donald Trump said Anthropic is bad. That's all he understands I think. It doesn't get any deeper than that.

 

[BackAgain]

Deploying it without human safeguards.

That is one point on which we apparently all agree.

I hasten to note, that some of our human safeguards might demonstrate a big indifference to doing that part of the job. People in our clandestine services do not always adhere to our general rules about the sanctity of human lives — regardless of AI.

It might also be of some concern that the sole difference is that we now have a human to place blame upon. The individual targets still get eliminated.

 

[ding]

Donald Trump said Anthropic is bad. That's all he understands I think. It doesn't get any deeper than that.

Administrations change while erosion of civil liberties remains. Think Patriot Act.

 

[Anomalism]

Administrations change while erosion of civil liberties remains. Think Patriot Act.

Exactly.

Each step doesn't seem important until we look back and can't figure out how the hell we got to where we are.

 

[ding]

Exactly.

Each step doesn't seem important until we look back and can't figure out how the hell we got to where we are.

Evil usually occurs gradually in incremental steps.

 

[Anomalism]

Evil usually occurs gradually in incremental steps.

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

 

[BackAgain]

Administrations change while erosion of civil liberties remains. Think Patriot Act.

Not for nothing, but the USA PATRIOT ACT is both very good and useful while also being a public law which can be abused. (I refer to semi secret FISA Courts as included in that problem of abuse.)

It seems to me that one of the major objections to it is that it has — contained within its provisions — undeniable risk for misuse and abuse. I’d like to refute that concern, but I honestly cannot.

However, I’m absolutely sure that many of our laws contain within them provisions allowing for possible misuse and abuse. I don’t see any realistic way of preventing such things for any law administered by mere humans.

 

[ding]

Not for nothing, but the USA PATRIOT ACT is both very good and useful while also being a public law which can be abused. (I refer to semi secret FISA Courts as included in that problem of abuse.)

It seems to me that one of the major objections to it is that it has — contained within its provisions — undeniable risk for misuse and abuse. I’d like to refute that concern, but I honestly cannot.

However, I’m absolutely sure that many of our laws contain within them provisions allowing for possible misuse and abuse. I don’t see any realistic way of preventing such things for any law administered by mere humans.

I know of no other laws that are onerous as the Patriot Act. Which if I understand correctly has expired but has been replaced with something else.

The Patriot Act (2001) is widely considered one of the most significant erosions of civil liberties in U.S. history, heavily criticized for enabling mass surveillance and weakening Fourth Amendment protections. It allowed "sneak and peek" warrants, secret access to personal records, and broad wiretapping, often without probable cause.
DigitalCommons@USU +4
Key criticisms and impacts of the Act include:

• Surveillance Expansion: The law authorized the government to access emails, browsing history, and financial records, sometimes bypassing traditional judicial oversight.
• "Sneak and Peak" Warrants: Law enforcement could search private property without notifying the owner until long after the search.
• "National Security Letters": The FBI was empowered to demand sensitive records from ISPs and businesses without a judge or grand jury.
• Chilling Effects: Critics argue it harmed privacy rights, created a "chilling effect" on free speech, and negatively impacted international academic exchange.
  NYCLU +5

While the Department of Justice claimed there were no substantiated civil liberty violations, the Act is widely seen as a major, and often abusive, shift toward unchecked government power, with many of its provisions remaining in effect long after the 2020 expiration.

 

[BackAgain]

I know of no other laws that are onerous as the Patriot Act. Which if I understand correctly has expired but has been replaced with something else.

The Patriot Act (2001) is widely considered one of the most significant erosions of civil liberties in U.S. history, heavily criticized for enabling mass surveillance and weakening Fourth Amendment protections. It allowed "sneak and peek" warrants, secret access to personal records, and broad wiretapping, often without probable cause.
DigitalCommons@USU +4
Key criticisms and impacts of the Act include:

• Surveillance Expansion: The law authorized the government to access emails, browsing history, and financial records, sometimes bypassing traditional judicial oversight.
• "Sneak and Peak" Warrants: Law enforcement could search private property without notifying the owner until long after the search.
• "National Security Letters": The FBI was empowered to demand sensitive records from ISPs and businesses without a judge or grand jury.
• Chilling Effects: Critics argue it harmed privacy rights, created a "chilling effect" on free speech, and negatively impacted international academic exchange.
  NYCLU +5

While the Department of Justice claimed there were no substantiated civil liberty violations, the Act is widely seen as a major, and often abusive, shift toward unchecked government power, with many of its provisions remaining in effect long after the 2020 expiration.

I understand their claims. I simply don’t buy it in the way they hope we might. And with no disrespect intended, I believe you accept their position because it aligns with your beliefs and concerns, but that’s simply not the same as them being right.

 

[scruffy]

Google is in this fray too.

Apparently their AI is still urging people to kill themselves.

Google faces lawsuit after Gemini chatbot allegedly instructed man to kill himself

Lawsuit is first wrongful death case brought against Google over flagship AI product after death of Jonathan Gavalas

www.theguardian.com

 

[ding]

I understand their claims. I simply don’t buy it in the way they hope we might. And with no disrespect intended, I believe you accept their position because it aligns with your beliefs and concerns, but that’s simply not the same as them being right.

I accept that government should be monitored and policed by the people they are supposedly serving.

 

[BackAgain]

I accept that government should be monitored and policed by the people they are supposedly serving.

Good. Me too.

But there are still real world lines and conditions.

Crucial state or military secrets often come with the need for KEEPING them secret. That might not be possible if the “people” can summarily review the records concerning those very matters.

I believe it’s fair to talk about it amounting to a double bind.

 

[ding]

Good. Me too.

But there are still real world lines and conditions.

Crucial state or military secrets often come with the need for KEEPING them secret. That might not be possible if the “people” can summarily review the records concerning those very matters.

I believe it’s fair to talk about it amounting to a double bind.

What does illegal surveilance and illegally detaining citizens have to do with state secrets? That is Gestapo and KGB behavior.

 

[scruffy]

This is probably part of what they use the technology for.

https://www.npr.org/2026/03/04/nx-s1-5717031/ice-dhs-immigrants-surveillance-confrontation-deportation-mobile-fortify