OpenAI、米国防総省との契約について詳細を公表
OpenAIのCEOサム・アルトマンは、国防総省との契約について「確かに急ぎすぎた」と認め、「見た目が良くない」と述べた。
キーポイント
契約の急ぎすぎた性質
OpenAIのCEOが国防総省との契約プロセスが「確かに急ぎすぎた」と認め、透明性や慎重さに欠ける可能性を示唆している。
イメージ上の問題
アルトマンCEOは契約の「見た目が良くない」と述べ、AI企業と軍事組織の提携に対する世間の懸念や批判を認識している。
OpenAIの軍事関連事業への関与
OpenAIが国防総省と何らかの契約を結んだことが明らかになり、同社の軍事・安全保障分野への進出が具体化した。
影響分析・編集コメントを表示
影響分析
この記事は、OpenAIが軍事組織との提携を進めていることを示し、AI企業の社会的責任と倫理的境界に関する議論を活性化させる可能性がある。特にCEO自らがプロセスの問題点を認めたことは、AI業界全体のガバナンスと透明性に対する関心を高めるだろう。
編集コメント
CEO自らが契約プロセスの問題を認めた点が注目される。AI企業の軍事進出に関する倫理的議論が今後活発化する可能性がある。
CEOサム・アルトマン自身が認めるところでは、OpenAIと国防総省との契約は「確かに性急すぎた」ものであり、「印象が良くない」と述べている。
原文を表示
By CEO Sam Altman’s own admission, OpenAI’s deal with the Department of Defense was “definitely rushed,” and “the optics don’t look good.”
After negotiations between Anthropic and the Pentagon fell through on Friday, President Donald Trump directed federal agencies to stop using Anthropic’s technology after a six-month transition period, and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said he was designating the AI company as a supply-chain risk.
Then, OpenAI quickly announced that it had reached a deal of its own for models to be deployed in classified environments. With Anthropic saying it was drawing red lines around the use of its technology in fully autonomous weapons or mass domestic surveillance, and Altman saying OpenAI had the same red lines, there were some obvious questions: Was OpenAI being honest about its safeguards? Why was it able to reach a deal while Anthropic was not?
So as OpenAI executives defended the agreement on social media, the company also published a blog post outlining its approach.
In fact, the post pointed to three areas where it said OpenAI’s models cannot be used — mass domestic surveillance, autonomous weapon systems, and “high-stakes automated decisions (e.g. systems such as ‘social credit’).”
The company said that in contrast to other AI companies that have “reduced or removed their safety guardrails and relied primarily on usage policies as their primary safeguards in national security deployments,” OpenAI’s agreement protects its red lines “through a more expansive, multi-layered approach.”
“We retain full discretion over our safety stack, we deploy via cloud, cleared OpenAI personnel are in the loop, and we have strong contractual protections,” the blog said. “This is all in addition to the strong existing protections in U.S. law.”
Techcrunch event
San Francisco, CA
|
October 13-15, 2026
The company added, “We don’t know why Anthropic could not reach this deal, and we hope that they and more labs will consider it.”
After the post was published, Techdirt’s Mike Masnick claimed that the deal “absolutely does allow for domestic surveillance,” because it says the collection of private data will comply with Executive Order 12333 (along with a number of other laws). Masnick described that order as “how the NSA hides its domestic surveillance by capturing communications by tapping into lines *outside the US* even if it contains info from/on US persons.”
In a LinkedIn post, OpenAI’s head of national security partnerships Katrina Mulligan argued that much of the discussion around the contract language assumes “the only thing standing between Americans and the use of AI for mass domestic surveillance and autonomous weapons is a single usage policy provision in a single contract with the Department of War.”
“That’s not how any of this works,” Mulligan said, adding, “Deployment architecture matters more than contract language […] By limiting our deployment to cloud API, we can ensure that our models cannot be integrated directly into weapons systems, sensors, or other operational hardware.”
Altman also fielded questions about the deal on X, where he admitted it had been rushed and resulted in significant backlash against OpenAI (to the extent that Anthropic’s Claude overtook OpenAI’s ChatGPT in Apple’s App Store on Saturday). So why do it?
“We really wanted to de-escalate things, and we thought the deal on offer was good,” Altman said. “If we are right and this does lead to a de-escalation between the DoW and the industry, we will look like geniuses, and a company that took on a lot of pain to do things to help the industry. If not, we will continue to be characterized as […] rushed and uncareful.”
*When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.*
Anthony Ha is TechCrunch’s weekend editor. Previously, he worked as a tech reporter at Adweek, a senior editor at VentureBeat, a local government reporter at the Hollister Free Lance, and vice president of content at a VC firm. He lives in New York City.
You can contact or verify outreach from Anthony by emailing anthony.ha@techcrunch.com.
関連記事
今日のまとめ
AI日報で今日の重要ニュースをまとめ読み