Humans are 100% in the loop with software patches and there are many people in the chain so that provenance is maintained. It’s not that Claude could never look at the source code
Humans are 100% in the loop with software patches and there are many people in the chain so that provenance is maintained. It’s not that Claude could never look at the source code
Correct, anthropic's requirement was human-in-the-loop.
The DoD's response was to ban anthropic from all DoD facing activity and supply chains, whether or not there is a human in the loop. This does in fact run into exactly GP's issue. (or as I suggest elsewhere, can Boeing use Claude Code for software development?)
It’s hardly “self defining” as the Appeals Court noted because military operations can involve different degrees of human involvement in targeting decisions. It’s not as binary as people have been trying to portray it.
[1] https://media.cadc.uscourts.gov/opinions/docs/2026/09/26-104...
Find me what degrees of human involvement bombed the girls school.
Humans make mistakes too.
Perhaps Anthropic was right in needing more oversight in using AI for murder
Maybe. That statement is doing a lot of heavy lifting. It’s a different argument than saying Anthropic’s restriction would have prevented it (it was based on bad intel/old military installation)