Who runs the government changes every 2 to 4 years… are you suggesting we completely swap every vendor in the US government to align with whatever political party is in office?

There’s nothing indicating Anthropic was not keeping their end of the contract. If they had, there would have been other recourse.

>are you suggesting we completely swap every vendor

I think American companies should be supporting the government as much as possible. Even when it switches.

>There’s nothing indicating Anthropic was not keeping their end of the contract.

Which is why we are talking about risk and not breach of contract.

This was not manipulated to hinder the mission. Every account of this indicates it was clearly spelled out. They could not use it for mass surveillance or for targeting. The lawyers at the DOD did not miss this. They agreed to the terms, because they had no intent to use it for such purpose purposes.

This is like the change order from hell.

Nothing was stopping the DOD from just entering into a new contract with OpenAI…

That is not what they are doing. They could have just canceled the contract and paid the exit clause. This is retaliation, because Anthropic would not move on their pre-negotiated terms. As a result, they are now been from being used anywhere in the US government.

Let me ask you this, if Anthropic did allow them to use it for surveillance… do you think it would stop at the Pentagon?

The military is bound by contract, just like any other government agency. They entered into a contract, with these clauses well-known. This was OK because they have all the same problems every other organization uses AI for.

They could’ve just negotiate a new contract with OpenAI, without banning it from every government agency. But I’m sure that would’ve triggered some kind of extra clause and cost money…

Your entire statement lacks any type of fact.

Anthropic did not change the terms. Those were the terms the US Government signed. It was not secret, it was explicit identified and accepted as a term.

The analogy would be: “A customer agreed to a contract, and after running into a clause of the contract they no longer wanted to follow…canceled the contract unilaterally…which also violated the contract.”

And then declared the other side a supply chain risk, claiming it is a potential vector for a national adversary to break in and cause unwanted bad things to happen unrelated to this contract.

It seems like absurdly bad faith starting at breaking the contract (over "you have to follow the law", no less!) and then to retaliate after that with trying to destroy the company's reputation and ability to do business. The boot licking going on here justifying the government operating in bad faith is both disappointing and short sighted. I didn't think the leopards would eat MY face!

And then another company got the contract, claiming they got all the conditions (and more!) that the original contractor was sour about.

I don't know how anyone can look at the situation and see anything but an abuse of power. The government could have just as easily contacted with another provider. This whole thing is vindictive

The US govt does not build out infrastructure. They at best subsidize it over long periods of time.

To answer your question, you build your datacenters where there is capacity or you plan with the utility in the area you want to build. This process takes years.

They are not doing that. They are building them as fast and as cheaply as possible.

As a result they are cutting corners and are leading to all of the complaints.

They are as a result stealing from the future to make a profit today.

The grid does not have gigawatts of extra base load capacity available as that has always been looked upon as wasteful.

They use the latest llama.cpp under the hood but built for specific AMD GPU hardware.

Lemonade is really just a management plane/proxy. It translates ollama/anthropic APIs to OpenAI format for llama.cpp. It runs different backends for sst/tts and image generation. Lets you manage it all in one place.

It is optimized for compatibility across different APIs as well as has specific hardware builds for AMD GPUs and NPUs. It’s run by AMD.

Under the hood they are both running llama.cpp, but this has specific builds for different GPUs. Not sure if the 9070 is one, I am running it on a 370 and 395 APU.

It’s an easy way to get started and maintain a local AI stack that concentrates on AMD optimization. It is a one stop install for endpoints for sst, tts, image generation, and normal LLM. It has its own webui for management and interacting with the endpoints.

It also has endpoints that are compatible with OpenAI, Ollama, and Anthropic so you can throw any tool that is compatible with those and it will just run.

It bundles tools, model selection, and overall management.

It’s portable in the sense it will install on any of the supported OS using CPU or vulkan backends. But it only supports out of the box ROCM builds and AMD NPUs. There is a way to override which llama.cpp version it uses if you want to run it on CUDA, but that adds more overhead to manage.

If you have an AMD machine and want to run local models with minimal headache…it’s really the easiest method.

This runs on my NAS, handles my home assistant setup.

I have a strix halo and another server running various CUDA cards I manage manually by updating to bleeding edge versions of llama.cpp or vllm.