Well, or just the possibility of future-proofing the agreement in favor of the US government, as well as walking back the slippery slope of „no autonomic lethality” and „no mass surveillance”.

The former, grants the Congress the ability to change the definition of all „lawful use” as democratically mandated (if the war is officially declared, if the martial law is officially declared).

The latter, is subtle. There can exist a human responsibility for lethal actions taken by fully autonomous AI - the individual who deploys it, for instance, can be made responsible for the consequences even if each individual „pulling of a trigger” has no human in the loop (Dario’s PoV unacceptable).

Similarly, and less subtly, acceptance of foreign mass surveillance, domestic surveillance (as long as its lawful and not meeting the unlawful mass surveillance limits!) seems to be more in the Pentagon’s favor.

Whether we like it or not, we’re heading into some very unstable time. Anthropic wanted to anchor its performance to stable (maybe stale) social norms, Pentagon wanted to rely on AI provider even as we change those norms.

"All lawful uses" has no meaning when a malignant narcissistic sociopath in power controlled by ruthless rich psychopaths can now rewrite every law at will.

Because the US government has such a great track record on ensuring that this kind of stuff is only done legally with the utmost integrity. /s