I absolutely do get it, but if you assume that eventually (and by that I mean: very, very soon) somebody else will do it, in how far is this line of action simply opting out of having some say in all of it and taking responsibility for situation that you instrumented?

And I am honestly not sure.

If your stance is "well, this is something that should just not happen" and also believe that is absolutely will happen, then what are you doing by saying "but it won't be us, it will instead be other people (who were enabled and inspired by our work in unsurprising ways)".

On the other hand, just the act of resisting could tip the scale in some incalculable and hopefully positive way.

Yes - Anthropic _does_ incur business risk if their products are misused and this becomes a scandal. Legally the government may be in the clear to use the product, but that doesn’t mean Anthropic’s business is protected. Moral concerns aside, it’s their prerogative to decide not to take on a customer that may misuse their product in a way that might incur reputational harm.

Or it was their prerogative, until the Trump administration. Now even private companies must bend the knee.