-------------------------------发文提醒---------------------------------- 1.发文前请先详阅[新闻]分类发文规范，未依规范发文将受处分。 2.发文请依照格式文章标明段落，不符合格式者依 1-2-1 处分。 3.连结过长请善用缩网址服务，连结不能点击者板规 1-2-2 处分。 4.心得/评论请尽量充实，心得过短或滥竽充数将以板规 1-2-3 处分。 ------------------------ 按ctrl+y 可删除以上内容。 ---------------------- 原文标题： Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War 原文连结： https://www.anthropic.com/news/statement-department-of-war 发布时间： 2026年2月26日 记者署名： ※原文无记载者得留空 原文内容： 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. However, in a narrow set of cases, we believe AI can undermine, rather than defend, 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 intelligence and counterintelligence missions. But using these systems for mass domestic surveillance is incompatible with democratic values. AI-driven mass surveillance presents serious, novel risks to our fundamental liberties. To the extent that such surveillance is currently legal, this is only because the law has 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 associations from public sources without obtaining a warrant, a practice the Intelligence Community has acknowledged raises privacy concerns and that has generated bipartisan opposition in Congress. Powerful AI makes it possible to assemble this 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 weapons (those that take humans out of the loop entirely and automate selecting and engaging targets) may prove critical for our national defense. But today, frontier AI systems are simply not reliable enough to power fully autonomous weapons. 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 the critical judgment that our highly trained, professional troops exhibit every day. They need to be deployed with proper guardrails, which don’t exist today. 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 above. 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 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. Regardless, these threats do not change our position: we cannot in good conscience accede to their request. It is the Department’s prerogative to select contractors most aligned with their vision. But given the substantial value that Anthropic’s technology provides 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 safeguards in place. Should the Department choose to offboard Anthropic, we will work to enable a smooth transition to another provider, avoiding any disruption to ongoing military planning, operations, or other critical missions. Our models will be available on the expansive terms we have proposed for as long as required. We remain ready to continue our work to support the national security of the United States. 达里奥·阿莫代（Dario Amodei）关於我们与战争部（Department of War）讨论的声明 2026年2月26日 我深信，利用人工智慧来保卫美国及其他民主国家，并击败我们的独裁对手，具有攸关存亡的重要性。 因此，Anthropic 一直积极主动地将我们的模型部署到战争部和情报界。我们是第一家在美国政府机密网路中部署模型的前沿 AI 公司，是第一家在国家实验室部署模型的公司，也是第一家为国家安全客户提供客制化模型的公司。Claude 被广泛应用於战争部和其他国家安全机构的任务关键型应用中，例如情报分析、建模与模拟、作战计画、网路行动等。 Anthropic 也采取行动扞卫美国在 AI 领域的领先地位，即使这违背了公司的短期利益。我们选择放弃数亿美元的收入，切断了与中国共产党（其中部分被战争部列为中国军方企业）相关之公司使用 Claude 的管道，关闭了中共支持、企图滥用 Claude 的网路攻击，并倡导对晶片实施严格的出口管制，以确保民主国家的优势。 Anthropic 充分了解，做出军事决定的是战争部，而非私人企业。我们从未对特定的军事行动提出异议，也未曾试图以临时、随意的方式限制我们技术的使用。 然而，在少数情况下，我们认为 AI 可能会破坏而非扞卫民主价值观。有些用途也完全超出了当今技术能够安全、可靠执行的范围。有两个此类应用从未包含在我们与战争部的合约中，我们认为现在也不应包含在内： 大规模国内监控：我们支持将 AI 用於合法的对外情报和反情报任务。但将这些系统用於大规模国内监控与民主价值观背道而驰。由 AI 驱动的大规模监控对我们的基本自由构成了严重且前所未见的风险。尽管目前此类监控在某种程度上是合法的，但这只是因为法律尚未跟上 AI 能力的快速发展。例如，根据现行法律，政府可以在未经授权的情况下，从公开来源购买美国人详细的行踪、网页浏览纪录和社交关系纪录；情报界已承认这种做法引发了隐私疑虑，并在国会引发了跨党派的反对。强大的 AI 使得将这些分散的、单看似乎无害的个人数据，自动且大规模地拼凑成任何人生活的完整轮廓成为可能。 全自动化武器：部分自动化武器（如今日在乌克兰使用的武器）对扞卫民主至关重要。即使是全自动化武器（即完全将人类排除在决策回圈外，自动选择并交战目标的武器），未来也可能对我们的国防至关重要。但时至今日，前沿 AI 系统的可靠性还不足以驱动全自动化武器。我们不会明知故犯地提供会让美国战士和平民陷入危险的产品。我们曾提议直接与战争部合作进行研发，以提高这些系统的可靠性，但他们没有接受这项提议。此外，若没有适当的监管，就不能指望全自动化武器能发挥我们训练有素的专业部队每天所展现的关键判断力。它们的部署需要配备适当的安全防护机制（guardrails），而这些机制目前还不存在。 据我们所知，迄今为止，这两个例外情况并未成为我们武装部队加速采用和使用我们模型的障碍。 战争部已声明，他们只会与同意「任何合法用途」并移除上述情况中安全机制的 AI 公司签约。他们威胁，如果我们保留这些防护机制，就会将我们从其系统中剔除；他们还威胁要将我们列为「供应链风险（supply chain risk）」（这个标签通常只保留给美国的对手，从未应用於美国公司），并威胁动用《国防生产法》（Defense Production Act）来强制我们移除这些安全机制。後面这两个威胁本质上是矛盾的：一个将我们标记为安全风险；另一个则将 Claude 标记为对国家安全不可或缺的要素。 无论如何，这些威胁都不会改变我们的立场：凭着良知，我们无法同意他们的要求。 选择最符合其愿景的承包商是战争部的特权。但监於 Anthropic 的技术为我们的武装部队提供了巨大的价值，我们希望他们能重新考虑。我们强烈希望在保留这两项防护机制的前提下，继续为战争部和我们的军人服务。如果战争部选择与 Anthropic 解约，我们将努力协助平稳过渡给另一家供应商，避免对正在进行的军事计画、行动或其他关键任务造成任何干扰。只要有需要，我们的模型将继续根据我们提出的广泛条款提供使用。 我们随时准备好继续我们的工作，以支持美国的国家安全。 心得/评论： Anthropic 拿到国防合约 正式将OAI 大到不能倒的叙事结束 这两家只会有一家留着的话 应该是利好亚麻 OpenAI 应该也有被通知接收 而这篇宣告就是控制舆论来让战争部不敢解约给OpenAI的目的 任何人接受战争部的合约都等於间接承认监控人民，除了Anthropic PLTR还有的跌 ----- Sent from JPTT on my iPhone --

※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc), 来自: 42.77.150.64 (台湾) ※ 文章网址: https://webptt.com/cn.aspx?n=bbs/Stock/M.1772151512.A.294.html