News: 0179315750

  ARM Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set fire to him and he's warm for the rest of his life (Terry Pratchett, Jingo)

Anthropic Denies Federal Agencies Use of Claude for Surveillance Tasks (semafor.com)

(Wednesday September 17, 2025 @11:27AM (msmash) from the drawing-a-line dept.)


Anthropic has [1]declined requests from federal law enforcement contractors to use its Claude AI models for surveillance activities, deepening tensions with the Trump administration, Semafor reported Wednesday, citing two senior officials. The company's usage policies prohibit domestic surveillance, limiting how agencies including the FBI, Secret Service, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement can deploy its technology. While Anthropic maintains a $1 contract with federal agencies through AWS GovCloud and works with the Department of Defense on non-weapons applications, administration officials said the restrictions amount to making moral judgments about law enforcement operations.



[1] https://www.semafor.com/article/09/17/2025/anthropic-irks-white-house-with-limits-on-models-uswhite-house-with-limits-on-models-use



And in completely unrelated news... (Score:2)

by Koreantoast ( 527520 )

And in completely unrelated news, ICE raids Anthropic's headquarters to verify visas of its foreign-looking workforce.

Well, to be honest... (Score:4, Interesting)

by nightflameauto ( 6607976 )

> While Anthropic maintains a $1 contract with federal agencies through AWS GovCloud and works with the Department of Defense on non-weapons applications, administration officials said the restrictions amount to making moral judgments about law enforcement operations.

Shouldn't somebody? I mean, clearly, the administration isn't going to, even though that's supposed to be part of their job.

Re: (Score:2)

by Stickboy75 ( 1868986 )

> Shouldn't somebody? I mean, clearly, the administration isn't going to, even though that's supposed to be part of their job.

A good question. Even if the answer was 'no' (it's not), it's Anthropic's prerogative to make moral judgments if it wishes regarding the use of its technology. It's called a "License Agreement".

Profits vs Security (Score:2)

by Unpopular Opinions ( 6836218 )

Got it. Until states subcontract access for this information via someone else willing to be the middlemen for a fraction of what Anthropic would ask governments. In the end, profits won again

Its their company they can do that (Score:2)

by FunOne ( 45947 )

What's wrong with a company making a moral judgement on how its product is used?

Re: (Score:1)

by Valgrus Thunderaxe ( 8769977 )

Would you agree that certain people *should* be surveilled?

Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

by Anonymous Coward

Except Trump doesn't want to be surveilled, he's got too many crimes on the go at any one time.

Re: (Score:2)

by GlennC ( 96879 )

Nothing, until the customer (in this case, the current regime) decides that the company is no longer entitled to its moral judgement.

Taking the bait (Score:2)

by medusa-v2 ( 3669719 )

> One of the officials said Anthropic’s position amounts to making a moral judgment about how law enforcement agencies do their jobs.

That quote was probably included to get the exact reaction I'm going to give, and I'm good with it. Set aside anything else Anthropic might do later.

Moral judgement is what we're supposed to do. When the friggin' AI companies think you've taken the quest for power and surveillance too far, you're in a very bad place.

Re: (Score:2)

by nightflameauto ( 6607976 )

>> When the friggin' AI companies think you've taken the quest for power and surveillance too far, you're in a very bad place.

> Preach.

> The moment where an AI company says, "Eh, boss? That may be a touch sketch for us," should make any real human scream in terror. Our government? "Heh, do it anyway. Come on. You know you want to."

Futile and symbolic gesture (Score:2)

by MpVpRb ( 1423381 )

There are lots of others who will take the money for anything, no matter how evil

We NEVER use Claude! (Score:2)

by nospam007 ( 722110 ) *

Albeit, we use many Claudettes.

Modern psychology takes completely for granted that behavior and neural
function are perfectly correlated, that one is completely caused by the
other. There is no separate soul or lifeforce to stick a finger into the
brain now and then and make neural cells do what they would not otherwise.
Actually, of course, this is a working assumption only. ... It is quite
conceivable that someday the assumption will have to be rejected. But it
is important also to see that we have not reached that day yet: the working
assumption is a necessary one and there is no real evidence opposed to it.
Our failure to solve a problem so far does not make it insoluble. One cannot
logically be a determinist in physics and biology, and a mystic in psychology.
-- D. O. Hebb, "Organization of Behavior: A Neuropsychological
Theory", 1949