Anthropic irks White House with limits on models’ use

Which part?

I should think that it was very obvious that America does not have a dictatorial government; this is hyperbole.

Obvious only to those with their head in the sand https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/openforum/article/ice-ra...

ICE raids do not a dictator make.

I don’t get this notion. Politics has a place on HN like any other interesting topic does, whether you like it or not

No need for that. I was just asking someone to clarify what they were saying.

Regardless of what you think about the government, that wasn’t a statement in the above. The statement was about tech companies. So it wasn’t clear.

Does threatening to prosecute office supply store workers unless they print certain flyers count as the behavior of a dictator? That doesn't sound like the behavior of a government respecting the First Amendment.

I think it would count as a (very) small element of that.

Any single element of dictatorial rule is dictatorial rule. There is no space for any amount of that bullshit, regardless of how inane seeming it is.

A) Boundary testing. Small bites end up being large portions after enough are taken.

B) If I shit in 10 gallons of chocolate pudding, would you want to eat a bite of that pudding?

That is a plainly absurd standard for deciding what is dictatorial rule.

It's very obvious that America has a dictatorial government, and I'm baffled why you would deny this. The dictator-in-chief has argued explicitly and repeatedly that the written laws of the land don't constrain him; he can shut down departments Congress ordered him to run, levy taxes they didn't authorize, and overrule or rewrite any statute he feels isn't correct. He seized 10% of Intel Corporation without even a fig leaf of legal basis!

Perhaps you're confused that the normal system of laws is still operating? That's just the nature of dictatorship in a large country. The dictator only has so much time in the day, and if he has to delegate anyway he might as well use the preexisting courts and civil servants. He just has to put supervisors on top who can credibly threaten to invoke his wrath if people step too far out of line.

You're being plainly absurd by splitting hairs over a dangerous destruction of the rule of law, complete breakdown of checks and balances, and an executive that is behaving like it is both above the law, and will never lose power.