這家就沒誠信的垃圾公司啊 惡名昭著 怎麼會有人信啦 公司創辦人Amodei兄妹 是OpenAI原核心成員 因為擔心Open醬過度商業化 違背初衷 跳出去自己開 標榜的就是超乎水准的道德層次(？ 結果呢 在競爭中為獲取訓練資料 到"盜版網站"大挖特挖 幹，你沒看錯 他們直接到盜版網站去挖 需要付費的非公開資料 人家其他企業挖網路公開資料 還可以說遊走道德邊緣 這都已經很臭了 何況他們這麼直接搶非公開資訊 毫無下限可言啊 最終賠了15億美金 遇到競爭、利益就被背棄承諾 呵呵 真的世界靈活的道德底線啦 講話跟放屁一樣 信誰都好 跑去信這種前科重大的 腦子不要了 ※ 引述《breathair (拆了？簡單了)》之銘言： : -------------------------------發文提醒---------------------------------- : 1.發文前請先詳閱[新聞]分類發文規範，未依規範發文將受處分。 : 2.發文請依照格式文章標明段落，不符合格式者依 1-2-1 處分。 : 3.連結過長請善用縮網址服務，連結不能點擊者板規 1-2-2 處分。 : 4.心得/評論請盡量充實，心得過短或濫竽充數將以板規 1-2-3 處分。 : ------------------------ 按ctrl+y 可刪除以上內容。 ---------------------- : 原文標題： : Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War : 原文連結： : https://www.anthropic.com/news/statement-department-of-war : 發布時間： : 2026年2月26日 : 記者署名： : ※原文無記載者得留空 : 原文內容： : I believe deeply in the existential importance of using AI to defend the Unite : d States and other democracies, and to defeat our autocratic adversaries. : Anthropic has therefore worked proactively to deploy our models to the Departm : ent of War and the intelligence community. We were the first frontier AI compa : ny 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-critica : l 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 agai : nst the company’s short-term interest. We chose to forgo several hundred mill : ion dollars in revenue to cut off the use of Claude by firms linked to the Chi : nese Communist Party (some of whom have been designated by the Department of W : ar as Chinese Military Companies), shut down CCP-sponsored cyberattacks that a : ttempted to abuse Claude, and have advocated for strong export controls on chi : ps 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 op : erations nor attempted to limit use of our technology in an ad hoc manner. : However, in a narrow set of cases, we believe AI can undermine, rather than de : fend, democratic values. Some uses are also simply outside the bounds of what : today’s technology can safely and reliably do. Two such use cases have never : been included in our contracts with the Department of War, and we believe they : should not be included now: : Mass domestic surveillance. We support the use of AI for lawful foreign intell : igence and counterintelligence missions. But using these systems for mass dome : stic surveillance is incompatible with democratic values. AI-driven mass surve : illance presents serious, novel risks to our fundamental liberties. To the ext : ent that such surveillance is currently legal, this is only because the law ha : igence and counterintelligence missions. But using these systems for mass dome : stic surveillance is incompatible with democratic values. AI-driven mass surve : illance presents serious, novel risks to our fundamental liberties. To the ext : ent that such surveillance is currently legal, this is only because the law ha : s not yet caught up with the rapidly growing capabilities of AI. For example, : under current law, the government can : purchase detailed records of Americans’ movements, web browsing, and associat : ions from public sources without obtaining a warrant, a practice the Intellige : nce Community has acknowledged raises privacy concerns and that has generated : bipartisan opposition in Congress. Powerful AI makes it possible to assemble t : his scattered, individually innocuous data into a comprehensive picture of any : person’s life—automatically and at massive scale. : Fully autonomous weapons. Partially autonomous weapons, like those used today : in Ukraine, are vital to the defense of democracy. Even fully autonomous weapo : ns (those that take humans out of the loop entirely and automate selecting and : engaging targets) may prove critical for our national defense. But today, fro : ntier AI systems are simply not reliable enough to power fully autonomous weap : ons. We will not knowingly provide a product that puts America’s warfighters : and civilians at risk. We have offered : to work directly with the Department of War on R&D to improve the reliability : of these systems, but they have not accepted this offer. In addition, without : proper oversight, fully autonomous weapons cannot be relied upon to exercise t : of these systems, but they have not accepted this offer. In addition, without : proper oversight, fully autonomous weapons cannot be relied upon to exercise t : he critical judgment that our highly trained, professional troops exhibit ever : y day. They need to be deployed with proper guardrails, which don’t exist tod : ay. : To our knowledge, these two exceptions have not been a barrier to accelerating : the adoption and use of our models within our armed forces to date. : The Department of War has stated they will only contract with AI companies who : accede to “any lawful use” and remove safeguards in the cases mentioned abo : ve. They have threatened to remove us from their systems if we maintain these : safeguards; they have also threatened to designate us a “supply chain risk” : —a label reserved for US adversaries, never before applied to an American com : pany—and to invoke the Defense Production Act to force the safeguards’ remov : al. These latter two threats are : inherently contradictory: one labels us a security risk; the other labels Clau : de as essential to national security. : Regardless, these threats do not change our position: we cannot in good consci : ence accede to their request. : It is the Department’s prerogative to select contractors most aligned with th : eir vision. But given the substantial value that Anthropic’s technology provi : des to our armed forces, we hope they reconsider. Our strong preference is to : continue to serve the Department and our warfighters—with our two requested s : afeguards in place. Should the Department choose to offboard Anthropic, we wil : l work to enable a smooth transition to another provider, avoiding any disrupt : ion to ongoing military planning, : operations, or other critical missions. Our models will be available on the ex : pansive terms we have proposed for as long as required. : We remain ready to continue our work to support the national security of the U : nited States. : 達里奧·阿莫代（Dario Amodei）關於我們與戰爭部（Department of War）討論的聲明 : 2026年2月26日 : 我深信，利用人工智慧來保衛美國及其他民主國家，並擊敗我們的獨裁對手，具有攸關存 : 亡的重要性。 : 因此，Anthropic 一直積極主動地將我們的模型部署到戰爭部和情報界。我們是第一家在 : 美國政府機密網路中部署模型的前沿 AI 公司，是第一家在國家實驗室部署模型的公司， : 也是第一家為國家安全客戶提供客製化模型的公司。Claude 被廣泛應用於戰爭部和其他 : 國家安全機構的任務關鍵型應用中，例如情報分析、建模與模擬、作戰計畫、網路行動等。 : Anthropic 也採取行動捍衛美國在 AI 領域的領先地位，即使這違背了公司的短期利益。 : 我們選擇放棄數億美元的收入，切斷了與中國共產黨（其中部分被戰爭部列為中國軍方企 : 業）相關之公司使用 Claude 的管道，關閉了中共支持、企圖濫用 Claude 的網路攻擊， : 並倡導對晶片實施嚴格的出口管制，以確保民主國家的優勢。 : Anthropic 充分了解，做出軍事決定的是戰爭部，而非私人企業。我們從未對特定的軍事 : 行動提出異議，也未曾試圖以臨時、隨意的方式限制我們技術的使用。 : 然而，在少數情況下，我們認為 AI 可能會破壞而非捍衛民主價值觀。有些用途也完全超 : 出了當今技術能夠安全、可靠執行的範圍。有兩個此類應用從未包含在我們與戰爭部的合 : 約中，我們認為現在也不應包含在內： : 大規模國內監控：我們支持將 AI 用於合法的對外情報和反情報任務。但將這些系統 : 用於大規模國內監控與民主價值觀背道而馳。由 AI 驅動的大規模監控對我們的基本自由 : 構成了嚴重且前所未見的風險。儘管目前此類監控在某種程度上是合法的，但這只是因為 : 法律尚未跟上 AI 能力的快速發展。例如，根據現行法律，政府可以在未經授權的情況下 : ，從公開來源購買美國人詳細的行蹤、網頁瀏覽紀錄和社交關係紀錄；情報界已承認這種 : 做法引發了隱私疑慮，並在國會引發了跨黨派的反對。強大的 AI : 使得將這些分散的、單看似乎無害的個人數據，自動且大規模地拼湊成任何人生活的完整 : 輪廓成為可能。 : 全自動化武器：部分自動化武器（如今日在烏克蘭使用的武器）對捍衛民主至關重要 : 。即使是全自動化武器（即完全將人類排除在決策迴圈外，自動選擇並交戰目標的武器） : ，未來也可能對我們的國防至關重要。但時至今日，前沿 AI : 系統的可靠性還不足以驅動全自動化武器。我們不會明知故犯地提供會讓美國戰士和平民 : 陷入危險的產品。我們曾提議直接與戰爭部合作進行研發，以提高這些系統的可靠性，但 : 他們沒有接受這項提議。此外，若沒有適當的監管，就不能指望全自動化武器能發揮我們 : 訓練有素的專業部隊每天所展現的關鍵判斷力。它們的部署需要配備適當的安全防護機制 : （guardrails），而這些機制目前還不存在。 : 據我們所知，迄今為止，這兩個例外情況並未成為我們武裝部隊加速採用和使用我們模型 : 的障礙。 : 戰爭部已聲明，他們只會與同意「任何合法用途」並移除上述情況中安全機制的 AI 公司 : 簽約。他們威脅，如果我們保留這些防護機制，就會將我們從其系統中剔除；他們還威脅 : 要將我們列為「供應鏈風險（supply chain risk）」（這個標籤通常只保留給美國的對 : 手，從未應用於美國公司），並威脅動用《國防生產法》（Defense Production Act）來 : 強制我們移除這些安全機制。後面這兩個威脅本質上是矛盾的：一個將我們標記為安全風 : 險；另一個則將 Claude 標記為對國家安全不可或缺的要素。 : 無論如何，這些威脅都不會改變我們的立場：憑著良知，我們無法同意他們的要求。 : 選擇最符合其願景的承包商是戰爭部的特權。但鑑於 Anthropic 的技術為我們的武裝部 : 隊提供了巨大的價值，我們希望他們能重新考慮。我們強烈希望在保留這兩項防護機制的 : 前提下，繼續為戰爭部和我們的軍人服務。如果戰爭部選擇與 Anthropic 解約，我們將 : 努力協助平穩過渡給另一家供應商，避免對正在進行的軍事計畫、行動或其他關鍵任務造 : 成任何干擾。只要有需要，我們的模型將繼續根據我們提出的廣泛條款提供使用。 : 我們隨時準備好繼續我們的工作，以支持美國的國家安全。 : 心得/評論： : Anthropic 拿到國防合約 : 正式將OAI 大到不能倒的敘事結束 : 這兩家只會有一家留著的話 : 應該是利好亞麻 : OpenAI 應該也有被通知接收 : 而這篇宣告就是控制輿論來讓戰爭部不敢解約給OpenAI的目的 : 任何人接受戰爭部的合約都等於間接承認監控人民，除了Anthropic : PLTR還有的跌 : ----- : Sent from JPTT on my iPhone ----- Sent from JPTT on my iPhone -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 114.40.244.152 (臺灣) ※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/Stock/M.1772156797.A.A8F.html ※ 編輯: pujos (114.40.244.152 臺灣), 02/27/2026 09:50:14