⚠️ Anthropic: "We cannot in good conscience accede" to the demands of the Department of War (* Defense)

[demmiblue]

⚠️ Anthropic:

“We cannot in good conscience accede” to the demands of the Department of War.

Concerns about the Department’s potential use of AI for mass surveillance and fully autonomous weapons have not been resolved.

⚠️ Anthropic:

“We cannot in good conscience accede” to the demands of the Department of War.

Concerns about the Department’s potential use of AI for mass surveillance and fully autonomous weapons have not been resolved.

— Leah McElrath (@leahmcelrath.bsky.social) 2026-02-26T22:55:17.395Z

Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War

I believe deeply in the existential importance of using AI to defend the United States and other democracies, and to defeat our autocratic adversaries.

Anthropic has therefore worked proactively to deploy our models to the Department of War and the intelligence community. We were the first frontier AI company to deploy our models in the US government’s classified networks, the first to deploy them at the National Laboratories, and the first to provide custom models for national security customers. Claude is extensively deployed across the Department of War and other national security agencies for mission-critical applications, such as intelligence analysis, modeling and simulation, operational planning, cyber operations, and more.

Anthropic has also acted to defend America’s lead in AI, even when it is against the company’s short-term interest. We chose to forgo several hundred million dollars in revenue to cut off the use of Claude by firms linked to the Chinese Communist Party (some of whom have been designated by the Department of War as Chinese Military Companies), shut down CCP-sponsored cyberattacks that attempted to abuse Claude, and have advocated for strong export controls on chips to ensure a democratic advantage.

Anthropic understands that the Department of War, not private companies, makes military decisions. We have never raised objections to particular military operations nor attempted to limit use of our technology in an ad hoc manner.

[PeaceWave]

1. This is huge.

[pat_k]

2. Yes! Take a stand for the nation and sue the shit out of the regime for any retribution.

Those who stand and fight against this corrupt regime WIN!!

[surrealAmerican]

3. They have no choice.

Autonomous AI weapons will kill people, and they will be sued.

[Tim S]

4. YES ❤️ YES ❤️ YES ❤️YES

[newdeal2]

5. If the Pentagon doesn't like it, then they should use a different vendor

It may be expensive to change but they should not be able to destroy a company who opposes their demands.

[highplainsdem]

6. Good! There'd been widespread condemnation of them loosening their core safety promise, as they

announced Tuesday AFTER that early meeting with Pentagon officials.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143621984

It looked like a step toward capitulation to Hegseth's demands, but if it was, the negative reaction to it probably made them realize they had more to lose by capitulating.

But the company said in its blog post that its previous safety policy was designed to build industry consensus around mitigating AI risks – guardrails that the industry blew through. Anthropic also noted its safety policy was out of step with Washington’s current anti-regulatory political climate.

[Gore1FL]

7. I like the announcement. They spelled "Defense" wrong, though. nt

[Layzeebeaver]

10. They did not

The difference between "defense" and "defence" is based on regional spelling: "defense" (with an "s&quot is used in American English, while "defence" (with a "c&quot is used in British English. Both terms refer to the act of protecting or defending something.

Thank you internet. Also I’m an American living in Britain.

[WmChris]

12. I thought

I thought you were referring to their spelling it as war in the name of the department. 😉

[reACTIONary]

8. I particularly like this observation:

I particularly like this observation:

.... they have also threatened to designate us a “supply chain risk”—a label reserved for US adversaries, never before applied to an American company—and to invoke the Defense Production Act to force the safeguards’ removal. These latter two threats are inherently contradictory: one labels us a security risk; the other labels Claude as essential to national security.

Who knew an AI provider could spot a logical fallacy?

[OGBuzz]

9. In war games A.I. has opted to use nuclear weapons 95% of the time.

So let's let the computers do all our thinking and decision making for us. What could possibly go wrong?

[frisbee7]

11. Apparently, this AI hasn't reached the Joshua level yet

How about a nice game of chess?

[COL Mustard]

13. Shall we play a game?

Loved that move!

[OGBuzz]

14. I hope it never does.

Elmo Musk has said repeatedly that A.I. and humanoid robotics will eventually replace most white collar and blue collar jobs. So what are human beings going to be doing when that happens? These billionaire, soon to be trillionaire, tech bros will soon be looking at the rest of us as useless air breathers and they'll have the means to do something about it. Check out these robots from China....