it would be like the pen manufacturer who ships pens with an automatic point retractor, AND a video livestream to the manufacturer from the pen AND remote control of the point retractor.
anthropic and contractors monitor the livestream remotely to make sure the pen is not signing drone strike orders and may choose to activate the retractor.
I might be mistaken, but in the case of national security deployments the models are airgapped and Anthropic doesn't actually have access to telemetry/logging from them.
however anthropic is demanding that they have access to chat logs for anything better than opus 5.
it is not possible to run recent anthropic models in a secure way. palantir, nvidia, booz allen etc have blocked fable because they can't run it safely.
But also they quite clearly have no idea how classified information systems work: air gapping is step 1 of that process, and no one from Anthropic would be working on those systems without a security clearance.
bedrock IL5, nvidia, palantir and booz allen have all blocked fable.
anthropic is demanding that they rat out their customers on anything better than opus 5.
see: [thein.fo/4dekujW]
also, bedrock govcloud does both log and review customer data. specifically, they log and review customer data when it is flagged by their csam classifier.
anthropic does not have dod cleared infrastructure.
it is anthropic alone deciding to rat out fable customers.
i am not making this up or lying, everything i claim is verifiable.
anthropic would likely have turned off the spyware for the dod. regardless the dod did not trust them to maintain claude with updates etc.
that is a lot to do with anthropic undermining dod by getting involved with safety at dod contractors (palantir).
going behind the boss and plotting was a bad idea.
it does not help the matter if the bidder rocks up to the pentagon for a $200m contract, with a troupe of bay area ea clowns who say that they don't know if claude is conscious and talk about saving the world from p(doom).
in a battle of ego between trump and amodei the latter is out of their depth. amodei is a newcomer starting a fight with a hardened criminal who has spent years amassing power over the media, the law and the republican party. anthropic are radically outgunned here.
on the matter of 'spyware' anthropic is reading the conversations per tos section F 'Covered Models'. [https://www.anthropic.com/legal/service-specific-terms]
the xAI models are available with no human review per TOS 3.4 'Deletion and Retention of User Content'. therefore it is not the same as the anthropic tos. [https://x.ai/legal/terms-of-service-enterprise]
the palantir claim is correct. it is covered here. [https://www.axios.com/2026/02/13/anthropic-claude-maduro-rai...]
the reasoning obfuscation really is true. per claude documentation:
it does not return reasoning. quote "No display setting returns the raw chain of thought."
it does obfuscate in thought process logs. quote "Summarization is processed by a different model from the one you target in your requests."
[https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/build-with-claude/thinki...]
the belief that claude might be conscious is clownish, on account of anthropic acting as if it is not conscious, that is my opinion.
i spend a good amount of time on anthropic because i think that anthropic specifically, is uniquely dangerous to society and human welfare.
Secondly you have made an absurd over the top exaggeration and blatant lies about Anthropics interaction with Palantir. You literally said Anthropic "ratted out" Palantir, a language that indicates Anthropic had some secret access to Palantir or made public something that wasn't already known. The partnership between anthropic and palantir was completely public and announced by the very same comapnies before the maduro case. And as far as public statements are known, Anthropic seems to have a specific idea of what kinds of jobs their model should be used for, and they clearly stated from start they didn't like its use for violence or violence without human oversight. They phoned Palantir as any partner would have a right to, for confirming if it was being used for killing or violence during the Maduro mission.
Your link anout summarization of thought has a line right at the end of the section where it says if the raw thought logs are required, to contact their sales team, so it is clearly a negotiable point.
How is the belief or not of ai consciousness clownish? It is a valid and pertinent question in general about all models and not just for Claude regardless of your perceived imaginary views of Anthropic.
>i spend a good amount of time on anthropic because i think that anthropic specifically, is uniquely dangerous to society and human welfare.
Here we are in moral not legal territory. So it is completely absurd to say that in a conversation right here discussing far worse companies eg Palantir CEO saying they are proud in supporting Israel's violent invasions and mass murders into its surrounding countries. Anthropic, as subject to our very discussion, is the only company among the big AI companies that seems to want to have limited dealings with the military and oversight over violent military use. They also seem to be the only major company that brings up the important question of AI consciousness. If you think Anthropic is more evil than the US government and military who has already illicilty killed millions in made up wars, then I have nothing to say. Anthropic from all that appears seems to be one of the most moral of the companies of similar scale. The only way you think Anthropic is uniquely dangerous to society is if you think mass surveillance and mass killing is great and the use of powerful AI's to assist in mass murder is even better, and opposition to these is evil. I cannot begin to think of the upside down mentality that leads to such a downright bizarre thought process.
again, anthropic is snooping, section F specifically: [https://www.anthropic.com/legal/service-specific-terms].
"Then prove the other ai companies don't."
xAI zdr is not snooping, section 3.4: [https://x.ai/legal/terms-of-service-enterprise]
openai azure zdr is not snooping: [https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/foundry/openai/conce...]
gcp zdr is not snooping: [https://docs.cloud.google.com/gemini-enterprise-agent-platfo...]
only anthropic.
"Then prove that the service they offered to the US government didn't have spying disabled."
the service they offered did have spying disabled. the security risk is from anthropic updating the claude and covertly bricking or degrading it.
quote: "In such an ongoing relationship where the vendor [...] “continuously update[s] and tune[s] the product,” the Department must establish and maintain confidence that the vendor will not add limitations that interfere with the Department’s use of the product." (p26)
"the Department relies on [petitioner] to provide regular updates to Claude" (p27)
[https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cadc.42...]