Subject: Re: Pentagon blackmails Anthropic


At issue is the guardrails Anthropic placed on its AI model Claude. The Pentagon, which has a $200 million contract with Anthropic, wants the company to lift its restrictions for the military to be able to use the model for “all lawful use,” according to two sources familiar with the discussions.

Reports I have seen indicate the issue is larger than that, words to the effect "China has no privacy protections, which allows them to develop their AI systems faster. In order for the US to keep up with China, privacy protections need to be eliminated here too", which provides the "national security" excuse to override all other concerns.

The DOD is reportedly insisting “that all AI labs make their models available for ‘all lawful uses'” while “Anthropic is willing to loosen its usage restrictions” except for “the mass surveillance of Americans” and “the development of weapons that fire without human involvement,” which—it should be noted—are only a small fraction of Anthropic’s existing usage policy. Critically, the DOD has not said why it objects to the restriction against using Claude to develop “the mass surveillance of Americans,”

https://www.americanprogress.o...

US diplomats urged to oppose data sovereignty laws impacting AI services

The dominance of U.S. artificial intelligence companies – many of which draw on massive stores of personal data to power their models – has underlined European concerns around privacy and surveillance. Officials across the continent have increased pressure on American social media giants, too.

https://journalrecord.com/2026...

From the Google net sifter:

The assertion that the United States must eliminate privacy laws to compete with China in artificial intelligence (AI) is a central, debated theme in current U.S. technology policy, particularly highlighted by the 2025-2026 Trump administration’s push to remove "barriers to American leadership" in AI
.
Proponents of this view argue that state-level privacy and AI regulations create a "patchwork" of rules that hinder innovation, and that unrestricted data access is necessary to keep pace with China's centralized, less-restricted AI development. Conversely, opponents and some experts argue that lowering privacy standards risks national security, civil liberties, and that focusing on trust and security can serve as a "secret weapon" for the U.S.

Steve