Connect with us

The Dictatorship

Anthropic says it will not accede to Pentagon demands as deadline looms

Published

on

Anthropic says it will not accede to Pentagon demands as deadline looms

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration on Friday ordered all U.S. agencies to stop using Anthropic’s artificial intelligence technology and imposed other major penalties, escalating an unusually public clash between the government and the company over AI safety.

President Donald Trump, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and other officials took to social media to chastise Anthropic for failing to allow the military unrestricted use of its AI technology by a Friday deadline, accusing it of endangering national security after CEO Dario Amodei refused to back down over concerns the company’s products could be used in ways that would violate its safeguards.

“We don’t need it, we don’t want it, and will not do business with them again!” Trump said on social media.

Hegseth also deemed the company a “supply chain risk,” a designation typically stamped on foreign adversaries that could derail the company’s critical partnerships with other businesses.

In a statement issued Friday evening, Anthropic said it would challenge what it called an unprecedented and legally unsound action “never before publicly applied to an American company.”

Anthropic had said it sought narrow assurances from the Pentagon that its AI chatbot Claude would not be used for mass surveillance of Americans or in fully autonomous weapons. The Pentagon said it was not interested in such uses and would only deploy the technology in legal ways, but it also insisted on access without any limitations.

“No amount of intimidation or punishment from the Department of War will change our position on mass domestic surveillance or fully autonomous weapons,” the company said. “We will challenge any supply chain risk designation in court.”

The government’s effort to assert dominance over the internal decision-making of the company comes amid a wider clash over AI’s role in national security and concerns about how increasingly capable machines could be used in high-stakes situations involving lethal force, sensitive information or government surveillance.

OpenAI strikes deal with Pentagon hours after Anthropic was punished

Hours after its competitor was punished, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman announced on Friday night that his company struck a deal with the Pentagon to supply its AI to classified military networks, potentially filling a gap created by Anthropic’s ouster.

But Altman said that the same red lines that were the sticking point in Anthropic’s dispute with the Pentagon are now enshrined in OpenAI’s new partnership.

“Two of our most important safety principles are prohibitions on domestic mass surveillance and human responsibility for the use of force, including for autonomous weapon systems,” Altman wrote, adding that the Defense Department “agrees with these principles, reflects them in law and policy, and we put them into our agreement.”

Altman also said he hopes the Pentagon will “offer these same terms to all AI companies” as a way to “de-escalate away from legal and governmental actions and toward reasonable agreements.”

Trump and others lash out at Anthropic

Trump said Anthropic made a mistake trying to strong-arm the Pentagon. He wrote on Truth Social that most agencies must immediately stop using Anthropic’s AI but gave the Pentagon a six-month period to phase out the technology that is already embedded in military platforms.

“The United States of America will never allow a radical left, woke company to dictate how our great military fights and wins wars!” he wrote in all caps.

Months of private talks exploded into public debate this week and hit a stalemate when Amodei said his company “cannot in good conscience accede” to the demands.

Anthropic can afford to lose the contract. But the government’s actions posed broader risks at the peak of the company’s meteoric rise from a little-known computer science research lab in San Francisco to one of the world’s most valuable startups.

The president’s decision was preceded by hours of top Trump appointees from the Pentagon and the State Department taking to social media to criticize Anthropic, but their complaints posed contradictions.

Top Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said Anthropic’s unwillingness to go along with the military’s demands was “jeopardizing critical military operations and potentially putting our warfighters at risk.” Hegseth said the Pentagon “must have full, unrestricted access to Anthropic’s models for every LAWFUL purpose in defense of the Republic.”

Trump’s social media post said the company “better get their act together, and be helpful” during the phase-out period or there would be “major civil and criminal consequences to follow.”

AP AUDIO: Anthropic refuses to bend to Pentagon on AI safeguards as dispute nears deadline

AP correspondent Ben Thomas reports that an AI company is rebuffing the Pentagon’s demands.

However, Hegseth’s choice to designate Anthropic a supply chain risk uses an administrative tool that has been designed for companies owned by U.S. adversaries to prevent them from selling products that are harmful to American interests.

Virginia Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, noted that this dynamic, “combined with inflammatory rhetoric attacking that company, raises serious concerns about whether national security decisions are being driven by careful analysis or political considerations.”

Dispute shakes up Silicon Valley

The dispute stunned AI developers in Silicon Valley, where venture capitalists, prominent AI scientists and a large number of workers from Anthropic’s top rivals — OpenAI and Google — voiced support for Amodei’s stand in open letters and other forums.

The moves could benefit OpenAI’s ChatGPT as well as Elon Musk’s competing chatbot, Grok, which the Pentagon also plans to give access to classified military networks. It could serve as a warning to Google, which has a still-evolving contract to supply its AI tools to the military.

Musk sided with Trump’s administration, saying on his social media platform X that “Anthropic hates Western Civilization.” Altman took a different approach, expressing solidarity with Anthropic’s safeguards and opposing the government’s “threatening” approach while also working to secure OpenAI’s deal with the Pentagon. It marked the latest twist in OpenAI’s longtime and sometimes acrimonious rivalry with Anthropic, which was founded by a group of ex-OpenAI leaders in 2021.

Retired Air Force Gen. Jack Shanahan, a former leader of the Pentagon’s AI initiatives, wrote on social media this week that the government “painting a bullseye on Anthropic garners spicy headlines, but everyone loses in the end.”

Shanahan said Claude is already being widely used across the government, including in classified settings, and Anthropic’s red lines were “reasonable.” He said the AI large language models that power chatbots like Claude, Grok and ChatGPT are also “not ready for prime time in national security settings,” particularly not for fully autonomous weapons.

Anthropic is “not trying to play cute here,” he wrote on LinkedIn. “You won’t find a system with wider & deeper reach across the military.”

___

O’Brien reported from Providence, Rhode Island.

Read More

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Dictatorship

Trump administration admits error in New York health care fraud probe

Published

on

Trump administration admits error in New York health care fraud probe

NEW YORK (AP) — President Donald Trump’s administration this week acknowledged it made a significant error in figures it used to help justify a fraud probe into New York’s Medicaid program, a glaring mistake that undercuts a federal campaign to tackle waste, mostly in Democratic-led states.

The error, which the administration admitted first to The Associated Press, prompted health analysts to question how many of the Republican administration’s sweeping anti-fraud efforts around the country were based on faulty findings. One of a few mischaracterizations it made about New York’s Medicaid program, it also reflected a common criticism that’s been made of Trump’s second administration — that it tends to attack first and confirm the facts later.

“These numbers could have been cleared up in a phone call, so it’s really slapdash,” said Fiscal Policy Institute senior health policy adviser Michael Kinnucan, whose recent analysis called attention to the Trump administration’s inaccurate claim.

The mistake appeared in comments made last month by Dr. Mehmet Ozthe administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, in a social media video and in a letter to New York’s Democratic governor announcing the fraud investigation.

Oz claimed that New York’s Medicaid program last year provided some 5 million people with personal care services, which assist people in need with basic activities like bathing, grooming and meal preparation. That would add up to nearly three-fourths of the state’s 6.8 million Medicaid enrollees.

“That level of utilization is unheard of,” Oz said in the video, adding in his post that New York needs to “come clean about its Medicaid program.”

But the real number of New Yorkers who used those services last year was about 450,000, or between 6% and 7% of total enrollees, CMS spokesman Chris Krepich told the AP this week. He said the agency misidentified New York’s approach to applying billing codes and had since refined its methodology.

“CMS is committed to ensuring its analyses fully reflect state-specific billing practices and will continue to work closely with New York to validate data and strengthen program integrity oversight,” he said in an emailed statement.

Krepich said the probe was ongoing as the administration still has concerns with New York’s oversight of personal care services and the Medicaid program and is reviewing the state’s response to last month’s letter. CMS had raised other flags about New York’s program, including that it spends more per beneficiary and per resident than the average state, has high personal care spending and employs so many personal care aides that the job category is now the largest in the state.

Health analysts said the state’s high spending reflected both high costs for services in New York and a policy choice to provide robust at-home care. Cadence Acquaviva, senior public information officer for the New York Department of Health, called Oz’s initial mischaracterizations “a targeted attempt to obscure the facts.”

“New York State remains committed to protecting and preserving vital Medicaid programs that deliver high-quality services to New Yorkers who depend on them,” she said.

In a statement, a spokesperson for Gov. Kathy Hochul said, “The initial claim by CMS was patently false, and we are glad they now admit it.”

“Governor Hochul has been clear that New York has zero tolerance for waste, fraud and abuse in Medicaid, or any other state programs, and will continue her efforts to root out bad actors, protect taxpayer dollars, and safeguard the critical programs that New Yorkers rely on,” spokesperson Nicolette Simmonds said.

New York probe is part of a larger crackdown

The Trump administration’s investigation into New York comes as it has similarly approached at least four other states, including California, FloridaMaine and Minnesota, with investigations into potential health care fraud. The anti-fraud effort appears to be expanding as voters in the upcoming midterm elections say they’re concerned about affordability.

Trump last month signed an executive order to create an anti-fraud task force across federal benefit programs led by Vice President JD Vance. As part of that project, Vance announced the administration would temporarily halt $243 million in Medicaid funding to Minnesota over fraud concerns, a move over which the state has since sued.

Kinnucan, the analyst with expertise in New York’s Medicaid program, said he’s concerned that the Trump administration’s adversarial approach to targeting fraud in some states “politicizes” a conversation that should be a team effort.

“We want to think collaboratively among all the stakeholders in the program about how we can actually fix it,” Kinnucan said. “We don’t want to have fraud be this political football.”

Oz made other claims New York advocates say are inaccurate

In his video, Oz made at least two other claims about New York that Medicaid advocates and beneficiaries say distorted the facts.

In one instance, he said the state recently made its screening for personal care eligibility “more lenient by allowing problems like being ‘easily distracted’ to qualify for a personal care assistant.”

Rebecca Antar, director of the health law unit at the Legal Aid Society, said the opposite was true — that the state in a rule change that went into effect last September instead made its program requirements more stringent. She said being “easily distracted” doesn’t appear anywhere among them.

Krepich said the administrator was referring to whether New York’s standard for personal care services was “sufficiently rigorous.”

“When standards are overly permissive, it risks diverting resources away from individuals with the highest levels of need and placing long-term pressure on the sustainability of the Medicaid program,” he said.

Oz in the video also referred to personal care services as “something that our families would normally do for us, like carrying groceries.”

Kathleen Downes, a 33-year-old who has quadriplegic cerebral palsy and uses personal care services in New York’s Nassau County, said she was offended by the notion that all Medicaid beneficiaries have family members who are willing and able to help.

Downes, who has been disabled since birth and needs personal care help for things like showering, using the toilet and eating, said she hires both her mother and outside assistants for personal care services, so her aging mother doesn’t have to take on those tasks full time. She said her mother did the labor unpaid for years, precluding her from pursuing other career opportunities.

“He’s assuming that everybody wants to and can just do it for free forever,” Downes said. “And that’s not feasible for a lot of people.”

___

Associated Press writer Anthony Izaguirre contributed to this story.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

Trump’s proposed cuts to NASA are an insult to astronauts like the Artemis crew

Published

on

Friday’s splashdown of the Artemis II crew, the first to travel to the moon since the Apollo program ended in 1972, is a moment of celebration for all of us on Earth.

But it’s also an important reminder that, despite this success, the current administration’s Office of Management and Budget is proposing budget cuts that will all but dismantle much of NASA. It’s surprising, illogical and very troubling.

The proposed cuts would terminate 53 NASA Science missions, throwing away more than $13 billion in taxpayer investment.

The proposed cuts would terminate 53 NASA Science missions, throwing away more than $13 billion in taxpayer investment and halting the development of nearly every future NASA Science mission.

These cuts would be an insult to our astronauts and entire NASA workforce. Astronauts and their colleagues are civil servants who work hard, accomplish nearly impossible things and represent our country to the world.

It’s an odd choice from an administration that has pledged to put America first, to be sure. But stranger still, and quite personal to me, is the OMB’s proposal to completely end NASA’s STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) outreach program, which supports students and teachers nationwide. Programs like this have helped the United States be a world leader in science and technology.

We cannot allow this.

The U.S. has many great institutions, but NASA is a unique part of the American story. NASA is the best brand our nation has. When people around the world think of the U.S. at its best, they think of astronauts exploring the moon, telescopes opening new windows on the cosmos and spacecraft making profound discoveries on other worlds. NASA is who we are when we’re curious, bold and united.

There is also a growing consensus in Washington that we are in a new space race, this time, with the China National Space Administration, which, by the way, is planning to have taikonauts walk on the Moon in 2030. If the race is on, why abandon so much? Why cede the lead? The U.S. cannot be first in space if it is second in science and technology.

The administration proposed almost the same draconian cuts to NASA last year. When it did, we the people fought back. The Planetary Society, along with more than 300 advocates and 19 other partner organizations, went to Washington and organized the largest grassroots advocacy outreach for space science in history. Tens of thousands of citizens from every state and congressional district wrote, called and made their case to their elected officials. Together, we successfully saved NASA.

Now, this year, we have no choice but to fight back. On April 20, we will return to Washington, where people can join in person or join our Save NASA Science campaign online.

Science is not a luxury. It is a responsibility. Our founders knew it; you will find “Science” cited in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution. Only a public space agency can sustain decades-long investments in the kind of science that tells us whether life ever existed on Mars, that tracks the asteroids that could threaten every living thing on Earth and that reveals the story of our origin.

NASA’s science program is a bargain for Americans. It accounted for one-tenth of 1% of the nation’s expenditures last year, a tenth of a penny of every tax dollar.

Cutting science would not just delay discovery; it would destroy it. It would shatter our STEM talent pipeline. It would abandon our international partners. And, it would cede U.S. leadership in space science to China and other nations.

NASA’s science program is a bargain for Americans. It accounted for one-tenth of 1% of the nation’s expenditures last year, a tenth of a penny of every tax dollar. And for every dollar spent, three come back into the economy. Every year, NASA generates $75 billion of economic growth and supports over 300,000 jobs in all 50 states.

Members of Congress and the Senate agree: NASA is a remarkable investment. I’ve met with both Republicans and Democrats, all of whom support space science. And last year, an overwhelming bipartisan majority rejected these same cuts.

NASA is what makes America great. It represents our best values: curiosity, determination, tenacity, and global cooperation. It proves that we are capable of extraordinary things. When we invest in scientific exploration, we invest in ourselves — in our economy, security and future.

If we concede and retreat from the frontier of space after a half century of leadership, it would be an unworthy choice. If Artemis II has showed us anything, it’s that the public, across the political spectrum, strongly supports space exploration, scientific discovery and a deeper understanding of the universe and our place within it.

Bill Nye is the chief ambassador at The Planetary Society, the world’s largest space interest organization.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

Artemis II mission splashes down, returning to Earth

Published

on

Artemis II mission splashes down, returning to Earth

After making history as the farthest journey into space humans have ever made, NASA’s Artemis II mission returned to Earth on Friday, splashing down off the coast southwest of San Diego.

The Artemis II crew splashed down successfully at 5:07:47 p.m. PT. The Orion spacecraft launched last weekfrom the Kennedy Space Center in Florida, the first crewed flight to the moon in more than 50 years. The entire mission from liftoff took a total of nine days, one hour, 31 minutes and 35 seconds, which NASA rounds up, to call it a 10-day mission.

In the buildup to the mission, questions about the craft’s heat shield led to concerns among some experts about whether Orion would hold up on reentry to the Earth’s atmosphere, the most perilous part of any crewed mission. A NASA-commissioned panel ultimately deemed the ship safewith the astronauts themselves endorsing it ahead of time.

The four-member crew — NASA astronauts Reid Wiseman, Victor Glover and Christina Koch, along with Canadian Space Agency astronaut Jeremy Hansen — embarked on the 10-day mission to fly around the moon, setting the stage for future missions aimed at establishing a permanent lunar base.

After splashdown, NASA administrator Jared Isaacman praised the crew, calling them “wonderful communicators, almost poets,” during an interview Friday evening.

“These were the ambassadors from humanity to the starts that we sent out there,” Isaacman said.

He also emphasized that this mission set the stage for a future moon landing — and base.

“This is not a once in a lifetime … This is just the beginning,” he said during the interview. “We are going to get back into doing this with frequency, sending missions to the moon, until we land on it in 2028 and start building our base.”

On April 6, the spacecraft reached 252,756 miles from Earth, the farthest distance traveled by humans. Artemis II broke the Apollo 13crew’s record of 248,655 miles, set in 1970.

The crew conducted a seven-hour lunar flyby, coming within about 4,000 miles of the moon’s surface and seeing areas of the moon never before seen by the naked eye. In addition to testing the spacecraft, the astronauts studied the far side of the moon during a solar eclipse and observed lunar geological features and color variations.

Now back on Earth, the astronauts will undergo medical evaluations before heading to shore and traveling to NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston.

The next such mission, Artemis IIIis expected to launch next year.

Erum Salam is a breaking news reporter for MS NOW, with a focus on how global events and foreign policy shape U.S. politics. She previously was a breaking news reporter for The Guardian.

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending