X Feed Intel beta

individual tinkerer enterprises
Weekly Prep Posts Topics History
789 relevant 273 topics 2290 posts $1.633 cost fetched 02-23T23:00
789
Relevant
273
Topics
2290
Total Posts
$1.633
Cost This Week
$1.633
Total Cost
2026-02-23T23:00
Last Fetch
← Back to Topics
Geopolitics & Policy

Pentagon AI policy and defense sector regulation

Discussion of Pentagon policy toward AI labs like Anthropic and government regulation of AI deployment in defense applications.

4 posts · First seen 2026-02-23 · Last activity 2026-02-23
TimeAuthorPost
2026-02-23T22:46 @Polymarket @KobeissiLetter 17% chance the Department of War bans Claude. https://t.co/HxUqe04q5L ↩ reply parent
2026-02-23T20:41 @rohanpaul_ai 🚨 BREAKING: The US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is calling in Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei to the Pentagon on Tuesday morning to discuss the military use of Claude. The Pentagon is pushing for the company to let them run the AI on top-secret networks, which are private computer systems not connected to the regular internet, without the safety filters that usually block dangerous or violent requests. These talks are reportedly on the verge of a total collapse because Anthropic is holding firm on their rules for how the military handles their software. --- reuters. com/world/us-defense-secretary-hegseth-summons-anthropic-ceo-tough-talks-over-military-use-2026-02-23/
2026-02-23T17:45 @robertwiblin RT @JenGriffinFNC: Via @Axios Scoop: Hegseth to meet Anthropic CEO and issue ultimatum as Pentagon threatens banishment. BUT “Claude is the…
2026-02-23T17:27 @ohabryka It seems like fine policy to me if you are worried about negative consequences from AI? I agree it’s not “sophisticated” but “refusing to have your resources used in causing great harm” just seems like a fine basis for policy? And it’s not like it doesn’t have a large effect on compute supply. Building somewhere that is not the US will be a bunch more expensive. Maybe not enormously so, but it’s going to be at least a few percent, and it’s a strategy that of course generalizes well so it’s hard to say how much (I.e. if the US bans them it’s hard to predict which other countries will too). It also just seems like a very natural first step for further more international regulation (at the least import restrictions, but possibly more intense things), which would help a lot. ↩ reply parent
@Polymarket 2026-02-23T22:46
@KobeissiLetter 17% chance the Department of War bans Claude. https://t.co/HxUqe04q5L
↩ reply parent
@rohanpaul_ai 2026-02-23T20:41
🚨 BREAKING: The US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is calling in Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei to the Pentagon on Tuesday morning to discuss the military use of Claude. The Pentagon is pushing for the company to let them run the AI on top-secret networks, which are private computer systems not connected to the regular internet, without the safety filters that usually block dangerous or violent reques...
@robertwiblin 2026-02-23T17:45
RT @JenGriffinFNC: Via @Axios Scoop: Hegseth to meet Anthropic CEO and issue ultimatum as Pentagon threatens banishment. BUT “Claude is the…
@ohabryka 2026-02-23T17:27
It seems like fine policy to me if you are worried about negative consequences from AI? I agree it’s not “sophisticated” but “refusing to have your resources used in causing great harm” just seems like a fine basis for policy? And it’s not like it doesn’t have a large effect on compute supply. Building somewhere that is not the US will be a bunch more expensive. Maybe not enormously so, but it’s...
↩ reply parent

Markdown Export

Loading...