Top
Best
New

Posted by BloondAndDoom 1 day ago

We Will Not Be Divided(notdivided.org)
2543 points | 806 commentspage 6
gunnihinn 19 hours ago|
The bravery of the people signing this anonymously is inspiring.
ekjhgkejhgk 16 hours ago|
What's uninspiring is your ignorance of game theory.

Anyone who puts their name on that list might potentially be a target. On the flip side, there is no signaling value in putting your name on the list anonymously. Therefore anonymous names on the list believe in it (tho some people might make the calculation that they can't handle being a target but they might still resist and obstruct in other ways.)

So: It's inspiring that a lot of people are ready to obstruct or delay even if they're not ready to deal with personal consequences.

gradstudent 16 hours ago||
> Anyone who puts their name on that list might potentially be a target.

My first inclination is to read letters like this as a threat from employees to the employer. It says hey boss-men, this shite is not on. Signing anonymously undermines that message. I tend to read those signatures as as, I don't like this but it's not worth my job. I have no faith in the efficacy or even existence of "obstruct or delay" tactics from folks like that.

ekjhgkejhgk 16 hours ago||
> It says hey boss-men, this shite is not on. Signing anonymously undermines that message.

No it doesn't. It says "Hey boos I'm telling you this shit is not cool, and there's nothing you can do to me personally because you don't know who I am."

Let me put it differently. Suppose YOU are the boss. You company has 1000 employees and you receive a letter with 500 anonymous signatures saying "we fucking hate what you're doing" (so, 50% of your employees, 100% anonymous). Do you get a little bit worried? Or do you get not worried at all because everybody signed anonymous? Actual question, let me know how you think.

gradstudent 24 minutes ago||
> "Hey boos I'm telling you this shit is not cool, and there's nothing you can do to me personally because you don't know who I am."

Why does this change the calculus for management? They don't pay folks to be happy, they pay them to do their jobs. Threaten to take away the labour however and you create a bargaining position. That's how strikes and threats of strikes work. This letter is fundamentally different. For a start, have you considered the veracity of a list of anonymous petitioners? How do you differentiate the real thing from a made up list?

andytratt 14 hours ago||
HN should apply their flagging of posts consistently. either flag the politics or not at all.
Thorrez 14 hours ago||
>If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Would this "open letter" be covered on TV news?

krapp 13 hours ago||
The concept of "tv news" itself is pretty anachronistic, and the premise that nothing that would be covered on "tv news" should be of any interest to "good hackers" is a bit elitist. That guideline, like the rest of this forum, was written in the early 2000s, for what one could argue was an entirely different world than now, with an entirely different relationship between culture and media, and the assumptions it makes about culture and media may no longer apply, if they ever did.

That said, here are some American examples - it is being covered by CBS: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/anthropic-ceo-dario-amodei-full...

And a local affiliate: https://www.cbs8.com/article/news/nation-world/trump-order-a...

And ABC: https://abcnews.com/US/wireStory/anthropic-refuses-bend-pent...

And a local affiliate: https://abc7news.com/post/anthropic-refuses-bend-pentagon-ai...

NBC: https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/trump-bans-anthropic-...

Fox: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/tech-company-refuses-pentag...

Searching "anthropic letter tv news coverage" in Google, the News tab has tons of other mainstream news sources, worldwide, covering this story.

So yes. This and many "technical" stories that appear on HN would be covered by "tv news."

nailer 13 hours ago||
[flagged]
vander_elst 19 hours ago||
What's crazy here is that a government I'd requiring de-regulation while companies are trying to keep stricter rules. What a time.
motbus3 22 hours ago||
The important thing to know is that no one wants a conflict. Don't be used for that. Don't accept that.

We protect our families when we are home. That's all everybody wants.

redbell 12 hours ago||
> They're trying to divide each company with fear that the other will give in. That strategy only works if none of us know where the others stand.

Prisoner's Dilemma in Action!

muyuu 6 hours ago||
looking at the news right now... i don't know about that
snickerbockers 1 day ago||
>We are the employees of Google and OpenAI, two of the top AI companies in the world.

Does this mean you dipshits are going to stop your own domestic surveillance programs? You sold your souls to the devil decades ago, don't pretend like you have principles now.

rayiner 1 day ago||
This seems squarely within the purpose of the Defense Production Act: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_Production_Act_of_1950

"Title I authorizes the President to identify specific goods as 'critical and strategic' and to require private businesses to accept and prioritize contracts for these materials."

If you invented a new kind of power source, and the government determined that it could be used to efficiently kill enemies, the government could force you to provide the product to them under the DPA. Why should AI companies get an exemption to that?

yed 1 day ago|
Well, for one, they haven’t invoked the Defense Production Act.
rayiner 1 day ago||
The very first point on the website is: “The Department of War is threatening to … Invoke the Defense Production Act.”
trinsic2 11 hours ago|||
You mean the Department of Defense? Just because a Authoritarian Regime starts renaming our critical institutions doesn't make it so. Its kind of like calling the "Gulf of Mexico" the "Gulf of America ". Its stupid to step into line with this.
yed 23 hours ago|||
A few days ago Hegseth threatened two mutually exclusive things: invoking the Defense Production Act or declaring Anthropic a supply chain risk. Today he went with the latter [https://x.com/SecWar/status/2027507717469049070]. That is the main topic now. What they did is basically the exact opposite of invoking the Defense Production Act.
khannn 19 hours ago||
Shades of "He Will Not Divide Us"
djgrant 11 hours ago|
The regulatory environment in the US is insane
More comments...