The intense debate between the Pentagon and AI startup Anthropic regarding military technology boundaries is causing significant repercussions across Silicon Valley. More than 100 Alphabet artificial intelligence researchers recently submitted a joint letter to management, urging the company to establish clear red lines in its collaborations with the U.S. military, specifically refusing to allow their technology to be used for mass surveillance or fully autonomous weapon systems without human oversight.

This Thursday, over 100 Alphabet employees addressed a collective letter to Jeff Dean, Chief Scientist of the company's AI division DeepMind, explicitly opposing the U.S. military's potential use of its Gemini large language model for surveilling American citizens or operating autonomous weapons. This move echoes Anthropic's earlier stance of refusing the Pentagon's request for authorization of "all lawful uses."

Concurrently, nearly 50 OpenAI employees and 175 Alphabet staff have published open letters criticizing the Pentagon's negotiation strategy, which they claim attempts to force compromises by dividing tech companies. They are calling for firms to "set aside differences and present a united front."

This development casts uncertainty over an impending cooperation agreement between Alphabet and the military. As Anthropic faces a potential $200 million contract loss by Friday and the threat of being labeled a "supply chain risk," while Elon Musk's xAI has agreed to the military's terms, a clear schism is emerging among Silicon Valley AI companies, torn between commercial interests and ethical principles.

The Pentagon's pressure campaign has triggered a backlash in Silicon Valley. The Department of Defense recently applied significant pressure on Anthropic, demanding it permit the military to use its Claude model for "all lawful uses" within classified systems. U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth explicitly requested access to models "unconstrained by policy limitations." However, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei refused to compromise, maintaining two non-negotiable red lines: no use for mass surveillance and no use for fully autonomous weapons, stating he "could not in good conscience agree."

This aggressive pressure strategy quickly triggered a chain reaction at other companies. Alphabet employees pleaded with Jeff Dean in their letter to "use all available influence to prevent any agreement that crosses these fundamental boundaries," expressing their desire to take pride in their work. The letter noted that signatories initially planned to also oppose "warrantless surveillance of any person worldwide" but removed that demand to improve the chances of their core requests being met.

Alphabet's executive response reveals an internal ethical struggle. Jeff Dean, one of the company's most influential software engineers, voiced support for Anthropic's position. This week on social media, he explicitly opposed government use of AI for surveilling Americans, stating that "mass surveillance violates the Fourth Amendment and has a chilling effect on free speech," adding that surveillance systems are easily abused for political or discriminatory purposes.

Alphabet has a complex history in handling employee activism. In 2018, a project with the Pentagon sparked large-scale employee protests, ultimately forcing the company not to renew the contract. Since then, Alphabet has centralized related decision-making processes and, in its race to compete with rivals like OpenAI and Anthropic, has relaxed some AI safety protocols. However, earlier this month, over 800 employees petitioned the company to disclose details of how its technology supports federal immigration enforcement, indicating that internal ethical scrutiny remains strong.

Faced with Anthropic's firm stance, the Pentagon is rapidly seeking alternatives. According to reports from Axios and The New York Times, the military has already reached a deal with xAI, allowing its Grok model access to classified systems under "all lawful uses" terms. Simultaneously, negotiations with Alphabet are in advanced stages, and discussions with OpenAI continue. The Pentagon has even threatened to invoke the Defense Production Act to compel access to Anthropic's model and has instructed defense contractors to assess their reliance on the company.

The potential risks of AI models in military applications are not unfounded. A wargame simulation led by King's College London, as disclosed by Tyler Durden, revealed that in 329 simulated rounds, top AI models opted to use nuclear weapons 95% of the time. Within the simulation, Anthropic's Claude exhibited "sophisticated hawkish" traits, decisively launching strikes as risks escalated to the nuclear level, while other models like Gemini deployed nuclear weapons at a very early stage.

Experts warn that AI's adherence to the "nuclear taboo" is far weaker than that of humans. In a future where military decision-making time is severely compressed, unrestricted AI application could lead to catastrophic consequences. This risk underpins the core reason why tech companies are insisting on establishing clear ethical boundaries.