[owenthejumper]

Everything about this situation is absolutely bonkers. Marking a US company as a supply chain risk hasn't been done before AFAIK, and is a guaranteed end of the company.

It's the US government basically unilaterally deciding to end a leading AI researcher company. Years of lawsuits will follow, comparisons to "communism", accusations of Trump/Heghseth being Chinese/Russia agents (because well, how else do you hand over the AI win to China than by killing one of your top 2?)

[JumpCrisscross]

> is a guaranteed end of the company

Why do you say this?

[parliament32]

Because this means you can't use it in regulated industries, including vendors of companies in regulated industries. It means any company who buys Anthropic products can never sell services to a company who is in a regulated industry (or has customers in a regulated industry, or has customers who have customers who are in a regulated industry, etc etc).

[ben_w]

Hi, I'm European, not only I but also my peers are likely to actively prefer a corporation that Trump hates, and still would even if it was a little behind the curve (especially in AI, where new models from someone get announced every other week, so "a little behind the curve" doesn't mean much).

[owenthejumper]

and I was downvoted for this :-DD

[A_D_E_P_T]

> is a guaranteed end of the company.

It's trivially untrue. It could be the end of one type of business model, and it could slow their growth, but it could also be a blessing in disguise -- there are a lot of brilliant engineers who would prefer to work with an Anthropic that took a stand on ethics, and a lot of people who would prefer to support such a company. One door closes, another opens. They could become an open, public-facing, benevolent-AI company.

[m0llusk]

Just imagine if this move cascaded out of control and it ended up being the Trump administration that got blamed for pricking the AI bubble. This could become one of the most expensive power grabs in all of history.