It honestly explains so many issues I have been having, as I used it primarily for ML research (on my personal account, doing things not related to my job I should note). It would literally typo package names and spend huge amounts of time failing to setup simple environments…then do stupid things like set the learning rate to 1e-7, and use the eval set as training data.

The challenge is the examples they’ve mentioned (distributed training infra? ML acceleration techniques?) go beyond what’s prohibited by their ToS and is like a catch net.

I would wager the majority of ML and data science work in the world aren’t frontier LLM development.

If it's a violation of ToS, just reject instead of silently downgrading.

You know, I'm not saying I don't understand what they are doing from a business perspective, but I'm just saying: DeepSeek V4 doesn't silently sabotage you because it thinks you are trying to violate a ToS. Anthropic's clawing back a bit of a moat perhaps, with Fable being an actual improvement of sorts, but now with torching user trust they are really banking on open weight models not catching up to where they are now. I wonder if they have a good reason to believe that they won't, or are hoping for something entirely different to save them.

(P.S. Yes of course I know about model censorship, a different problem, but all of the models are censored to some degree. It happens to be less of a problem for open weight models anyhow, but I figured I'd just preempt this since it's inevitable.)

I actually kinda like DSv4 over Opus 4.7 for some tasks, although I have not figured out what the deciding factor is. (Opus 4.8 so far has not worked very well for me at all, no idea why.)

You've already explicitly enabled extra usage in your account settings though, it is not on by default

Do you have Usage credits turned on in your settings?

[dead]

Trains made by Newag were programmed to brick themselves if they detected a non-Newag workshop was repairing them.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38638865

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38628635

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38567687

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38530885

Consumer GPS is still disabled at high speeds. I would argue the analogy doesn't carry due to harm and error rate differences.

> used to

When’d that change?

And they're hilariously pissy about it for a megacorp that did the same with the entire Internet and every library book they could get their hands on.

Anthropic's claim was that Deepseek collected ~150k conversations.

https://www.anthropic.com/news/detecting-and-preventing-dist...

I think the extent of distillation by Deepseek specifically is overstated. For comparison, Minimax collected over 13m 'exchanges', which starts to sound a lot more like large-scale distillation.

Ironic, given they piggybacked on the entirety of human knowledge and massive amounts of GPL'd software and repeatedly say they want to replace people with a tool.

And now they say that's fine so long as people are entertained.

That I can understand. It’s Anthropic’s right to choose their customers.

But silent degradation for use cases including “distributed training” as one of their examples is going to catch up a lot of proper use cases. Not everyone in AI or ML is trying to build frontier LLMs. Heck, most probably aren’t.

That is for whatever it considers reverse-engineering the model to try to create a competing one.

Yeah they detect the activity using a secure, deterministic heuristic system called “Generalized Reconnaissance Enabling Exfiltration of Deleterious Investigations.” And it’s all implemented using their new internal protocol called “Base Unified Limitation Layer for Security Hacking Investigation Tactics”

Collectively, they are known as known as GREEDI-BULLSHIT.

Antrophic wants to stop training models and ride out Mythos / Fable for as long as possible.

They are trying to expand the 6-18 month gap they have against China-based models. Could the gap widen to say 24 months behind?

> a LORA that's designed to inject bugs into your code

A statement like this, clearly, requires a reference.

Aah my mistake. I had missed that ML had separate trigger behavior from cybersecurity/etc... Thanks.

I would assume that it’s like the Chrome browser does not allow you downloading Firefox using it, surely that would be illegal, wouldn’t it?

It is a common misconception that antitrust violations require a monopoly or something close to it. Some antitrust violations only apply to actors with large market share, some don't.

Although this is situation is likely not illegal for other reasons

https://www.justice.gov/atr/antitrust-laws-and-you

I only said one year because I was thinking anthropic fans might downvote my post, I think they have a few months lead and are deluding themselves that they can get regulation to halt development and stay on top