I thought the Defense Production Act was one of those government powers that's terrible, and we should get rid of, but don't think to because it hardly ever gets used. I was wrong; the Defense Production Act has been getting used a lot recently. Is there any movement to get rid of it?

it looks like the relevant part of the DPA expires September 30 this year, and congress would need to renew it. although they have done so before in the past already

"The Pentagon continues to use Anthropic services without the requested changes" - how does this resolve if Anthropic makes a subset of the requested changes/negotiates a compromise, and the Pentagon continues use?

@2b3o4o more importantly, do we know what the changes are and will we know if they are implemented or jot

@KarlK feel free to share your view as creator of that answer, this is just my non-binding opinion (other opinions also welcome).

I think it would make sense for the "requested changes" to refer to what's stated in current reporting (allowing for use of claude in autonomous weapons and for mass surveillance of americans), and see if future reporting speaks to whether both those changes have been made or not. If future reporting doesn't speak to this either way and there is no strong indication one way or the other we would likely have to resolve the option N/A

@Bayesian I don't think the Pentagon is asking to be able to use it to surveil Americans. They're asking for "any legal use"

@FergusArgyll ah right. then it would be "The Pentagon continues to use Anthropic services without having access to Anthropic for any legal use"? basically they continue using anthropic and don't get what they asked for, is what i'm getting from the phrasing

@Bayesian yeah, it's murky though. My understanding of this story is:

(assumption #1) It is illegal to mass surveil americans

(assumption #2) dod doesn't have any immediate plans for a Claude-guided autonomous killer robot

So they aren't really asking to use it differently they just don't want a contractor pushing them around (+ I assume Anthropic culture is basically the opposite of current Dept. of WAR and that's not helping...) And I'm not sure if there will be a test case for at least a few years (when there's autonomous killer robots).

I sold my position but I think "The Pentagon continues to use Anthropic services without the pentagon saying we're satisfied that we can use it for any legal use" or something like that might be closer to creator intent.

I don't know, I confused myself...

This market came first: https://manifold.markets/2b3o4o/what-will-happen-between-anthropic

there's also this one: https://manifold.markets/bens/will-the-us-department-of-defense-c

ty for sharing, added to description, oops

@Bayesian do all safeguards need to be removed, or just a single safeguard?

edited to reflect the safeguards mentioned in current reporting

2% seems a bit low on "Anthropic stops advancing AI capabilities", since that includes both "Anthropic goes under because being declared a supply chain risk halts growth" and also "Anthropic does a Lavabit"

@FaulSname filled you, and an extra NO limit order up at 5%

@Bayesian thanks! Took you up on it. I hope you win, I like Claude.

https://manifold.markets/bens/will-the-us-department-of-defense-c

Now this market has settings "Closes on Mar 15, 2026"

Will the variants be resolved as of March 15, 2026 (or earlier, if settled before then), or are you planning to extend the market beyond Mar 15, 2026?

@bessarabov i wasn’t sure, open to suggestions. The intent is to cover the current feud and assuming it resolves in the next monthish but i don’t know if that is the case

@Bayesian I'm not sure either. Probably, I'd like the timeframe to cover the entire year of 2026. The variants should be resolved immediately once they occur, or at the beginning of 2027 if they don't occur (I'm not certain, but I have a feeling this could drag on for more than a month)