Anthropic has declared a 'no deal' in its AI-related negotiations with the U.S. Department of Defense. According to The New York Times, the exact nature of the backroom dealings remains veiled. However, one thing is clear: the ethical debate surrounding the military use of AI technology, particularly LLM-based technologies, has surfaced. Let's stick to the facts. What we need to examine now is the real meaning of Anthropic's 'choice' for the market.
Anthropic, often regarded as a rival to OpenAI, has been advocating for 'safe AI.' Their core value is to create 'AI that benefits humanity.' However, the very fact that they sat at the negotiating table with the Pentagon is ironic. Is the gap between 'AI that benefits humanity' and 'AI that can be used in war' unbridgeable?
Let's look at the competition. Palantir has already established a close partnership with the Department of Defense, developing AI-powered military operation support systems. C3.ai is the same. They quickly smelled the money. Did Anthropic choose a different path, or are they envisioning something bigger?
Anthropic's decision is too significant to be dismissed as a mere ethical choice. First, it sets an important precedent for the relationship between AI technology companies and governments, especially military institutions. When other AI companies face similar situations in the future, Anthropic's case will be an important reference. Second, it can affect investor sentiment. A 'good company' image may have a positive effect in the short term, but it can lead to concerns about long-term profitability. Third, as technologies like RAG (Retrieval-Augmented Generation) become more sophisticated and the scope of AI applications expands, ethical dilemmas will intensify.
This incident suggests that ethical considerations should be reflected from the 'design' stage of AI technology. Instead of focusing solely on improving technical performance, sufficient consideration must be given to social impact and potential risks. In particular, the development of On-Device AI technology lowers the controllability of AI models and increases the potential for malicious use. Investment should also be made in technology development that increases the transparency and explainability of AI models.
In conclusion, Anthropic's 'no deal' declaration is a signal flare marking the beginning of the AI ethics debate. In the future, AI technology companies will have to walk a tightrope between ethical responsibility and profitability. Investors should make investment decisions taking these points into consideration. Don't be fooled by the image of a 'good company,' but comprehensively evaluate long-term growth potential and social impact. Of course, it remains to be seen whether Anthropic will be able to smell even bigger money in the long run through this 'choice.' But right now, 'checking only the facts,' it is clear that Anthropic's decision will have a considerable impact on the market.