-------------------------------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 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. 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 -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 42.77.150.64 (臺灣) ※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/Stock/M.1772151512.A.294.html 推 Kroner : UC2是啥東西？求解釋啦！ 02/27 08:24推 Chricey : 吃過關節保健品，都沒什麼效果，有推薦的牌子嗎？ 02/27 08:33推 Chricey : 關節痛就老人病 02/27 08:47推 Chricey : 關節痛就老人病 02/27 08:54推 Kroner : 樓下關節痛都吃鞏固力 02/27 08:57推 Kroner : 關節痛有沒有辦法完全根治啊？UC2聽起來像萬靈丹 02/27 08:59推 Kroner : UC2對膝蓋特別有用嗎？有人能證實嗎？ 02/27 09:05推 Kroner : 我阿嬤說吃豬腳補關節，豬腳吃起來 02/27 09:09推 Kroner : 關節痛這種東西靠UC2就對了 02/27 09:11推 Chricey : 關節痛這種東西靠UC2就對了 02/27 09:13推 Chricey: 本魯關節痛始祖，葡萄糖胺保證沒用，乖乖吃UC2吧 02/27 09:15推 Chricey : 關節痛這種東西，比鬼還可怕！ 02/27 09:30推 Chricey : 有人知道UC2和其他關節保健品的差異嗎？ 02/27 09:31推 Chricey : 剛開始吃UC2，期待 02/27 09:32推 Chricey : 關節痛按摩有效嗎？ 02/27 09:33推 Chricey : 樓上UC2當糖吃，天天走拿飛 02/27 09:36推 Chricey : 喔喔喔，UC2 真的是超讚的啦 02/27 09:47推 Chricey : 樓上UC2當糖吃，天天走拿飛 02/27 09:56推 Kroner : 哈囉！關節痛真的超痛欸，我之前也遇過類似情況，後來去看醫生吃推薦UC2，效果不錯喔！ 02/27 09:59推 Kroner : 有人知道UC2和其他關節保健品的差異嗎？ 02/27 10:06推 Chricey : 我有在用UC2，感覺效果還不錯欸！ 02/27 10:08推 Chricey : 關節痛這種東西靠UC2就對了 02/27 10:15推 Chricey : 吃過關節保健品，都沒什麼效果，有推薦的牌子嗎？ 02/27 10:18推 Kroner : 長時間坐著工作，關節痛越來越嚴重，該怎麼辦？推薦UC2 02/27 10:45推 Chricey : 最近天氣變化大，關節痛好像更嚴重了。 02/27 10:46推 Kroner : 我也有過關節痛的經驗，真的超痛苦的啦！推薦去看醫生，早點處理比較不會拖延變嚴重。 02/27 10:54推 Chricey : 我有在用UC2，感覺效果還不錯欸！ 02/27 10:58推 Kroner : UC2是啥東西？求解釋啦！ 02/27 11:10推 Chricey : 本魯關節痛始祖，葡萄糖胺保證沒用，乖乖吃UC2吧 02/27 11:15推 Kroner : 搞笑吧！關節痛，你能嚴重點嗎？我要讓你知道什麼叫真正的痛！ 02/27 11:25推 Chricey : 我也有過關節痛的經驗，真的超痛苦的啦！推薦去看醫生，早點處理比較不會拖延變嚴重。 02/27 11:35推 Kroner : 求推薦靠譜的復健診所，小弟關節治好再來跪謝！ 02/27 11:42