Judge blocks Pentagon effort to 'punish' Anthropic with supply chain risk label

Opinions on the merits vary, but in this instance, the government's actions were undeniably overbearing and unilateral. It is encouraging to see the judiciary successfully function as a check and balance against such executive overreach.

meta, but the comment pattern in this thread strongly suggests inorganic support for the government's position.

I assume the court case [1] is referring to 10 U.S. Code § 3252 [2]?

[1] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72379655/134/anthropic-...

[2] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/3252

Some judicial pushback against authoritarian policies is good to see.

So much for all that alarmism a month ago. Just got to be patient and wait for cooler heads to prevail. Or it goes to show how Anthropic handled it well, by making their case as persuasively and assertively without delay as they had done.

[dead]

[dead]

[flagged]

[flagged]

[flagged]

[flagged]

Is the practical outcome much different? I doubt they'll get contracts either way, so the labelling was just a formality.

If anything it seems the label was just intended to give a veneer of legitimacy to the admin by using an existing mechanism and terminology, rather than saying "we're going to block your access because we feel like it".

I'm sure the contracts will start rolling in now.

What's the point of a supply chain risk distinction if you can't mark a company as a risk if they express that they will be a risk?