Post

Conversation

This amendment helps, especially closing the commercial broker loophole and ruling out the intelligence agencies explicitly. I note 'U.S. persons or nationals' does not include foreign nationals in the US and would like to see this include immigrants. I also appreciate that we now are saying it doesn't include domestic surveillance even if it is not 'mass'. And if they want to enshrine current law I would make that language more explicit. (I would have many other notes, but it's tough when you can't see the contract terms and I'm moving fast here.) I also very much appreciate the admission that, as I pointed out, they rushed into this, and agreeing on Friday was a mistake. And the implicit admission that some of the OAI claims made over the weekend about the contract were wrong, hence the fixes. I am very happy to see DoW not say 'no takesies backsies' and agree to adjust to fix issues, that's a great sign that a trust basis can work. The best sign of good faith would, of course, be to take SCR on Anthropic off the table, and simply terminate Anthropic's contract, if necessary with the additional limited steps suggested by to apply to contractors and subcontractors.
Quote
Sam Altman
@sama
Here is re-post of an internal post: We have been working with the DoW to make some additions in our agreement to make our principles very clear. 1. We are going to amend our deal to add this language, in addition to everything else: "• Consistent with applicable laws,
David Watson 🥑
Post your reply

How likely do you think it is that Anthropic removes arbitrary "mass surveillance" as defined as Anthropic sees it and replaces that language with something more concrete? Do you see a world that they'd used clearly defined limits with little ambiguity?
The best way to not do mass surveillance is to not do surveillance period, so that part certainly works!
I’m fixated on the fact that those bills listed, FISA etc, were all in place during the NSA’s surveillance of millions as leaked by Snowden. How is this new tweet which refers to them any different from before?
My understanding of the term "domestic surveillance" is that it means collection of communications where all participants are US persons and/or located in the US. FISA authority allows warrantless collection of communications where one party is a non-US person.
Inclusion of immigrants would be *very* partisan, though. Unless the law itself gets updated, governments can (and imho should) use AI to better understand & process legitimate & fraudulent cases, and you want the govt to have the best models handling this.
Do you understand what he means by this 'deescalate' claim? I am missing the mechanics of how him providing an alternative to ant is deescalation. To me it enables fucking ant over with SCR if they want to. ??