So you could basically harm the US financially by using copilot, claude, ChatGPT to do the same thing as they’d have to ‘ban’ it. Hmmm xaomi, you’re up!!!
Ekaros 2 days ago||
I also question do they even need AI? If "almost all" refers to many systems in general. How many of those are human exploitable? Or known vulnerable... Depending on number and importance even say 10% would be very bad...
nacozarina 2 days ago||
This soundbite is pure narrative. Most of the security of hi-side systems was simply being air-gapped. It is otherwise full of COTS software, much of it quite dated. You don’t need a fancy widget to break into them, simple access for a competent pen-tester is adequate. Don’t treat the fear-mongering as a scientific revelation; it ain’t.
Humorist2290 2 days ago||
It must be a wild time in the corporate espionage world these days. The annual operating budget of the CIA is like 20B. That's a rounding error compared to the burn rates of these labs.
Maybe it's conspiratorial, but it seems like the direction this is going is for the US to nationalize these companies. Somewhere between "too big to fail" and "national security."
asdff 2 days ago|
You probably don't want to nationalize them. You keep them private like how Lockheed et al are set up, so there can be no freedom of information act requests or any congressional meddling over the secrets and technologies within their purview.
LennyHenrysNuts 17 hours ago||
No it didn't
throw1234567891 2 days ago||
Through VPNs and their private hardware? This speaks poorly of their systems.
throawayonthe 2 days ago||
why would you... say this
walthamstow 2 days ago|
Because you're a political appointee doing a political job (and they purged the last guy for being insufficiently loyal)
ionwake 3 days ago||
Not being funny but does most of HN subscribe to the economist? I dont think ive ever paid for an online newspaper ( and Im not trying to be edgy )
amanaplanacanal 3 days ago||
If I was going to pay for a news subscription, it would probably be the economist. Or maybe the financial times. They both seem to still have solid journalism.
kingleopold 2 days ago||
they have solid exor acting for sure
arvid-lind 3 days ago||
more likely, most of HN who care about reading this article use something like archive.is
Simulacra 3 days ago|
Actual title "Donald Trump’s blocking of Anthropic is capricious and chaotic"
red-iron-pine 2 days ago|
par for the course, really. why is it even a headline?