[_heimdall]

That isn't my understanding. OpenAI and others are wanting to limit the government to doing what is lawful based on what laws the government writes. Anthropic is wanting to draw their own line on what is allowed regardless of laws passed.

[roxolotl]

I’m so confused by the focus on “all lawful use.” Yea of course a contract without terms of use implicitly is restricted by laws. But contracts with terms of use are incredibly common, if not almost every single contract ever signed.

[fc417fc802]

The administration objected to those terms of use. Anthropic refused to compromise on them. OpenAI agreed to permit "all lawful use" but claims to have insisted on what at first glance appears to be terms of use in their contract. But in reality those terms permit all lawful use and thus are a noop.

[abofh]

If the president does it, it's not illegal.

These were words issued by the president - which means at face value, if Trump orders it, it's not illegal - that was the fight that was lost today.

[xvector]

"All lawful use" is the weasel word that makes the whole contract useless for the purposes of safety.

That is why it is the focus of this debate.

[_heimdall]

"All lawful USS" in the hands of those that decide what is lawful is effectively a blank check. They want a terms of use that says "I do what I want."

[micromacrofoot]

more based on what the government permits by not litigating rather than written law