> it won't just reject ML research, which I can understand

I don't.

kube-system 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Anthropic has already been burned before on this. DeepSeek was trained on million of conversations with Claude. And DeepSeek created thousands of free accounts to burn all this compute at their expense.

▲

ceejayoz 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

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.

▲

ainch 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

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.

	▲	kube-system 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Ah, dang it. My college professors warned me about this: the Wikipedia page I read the other day is wrong!

▲

an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]

▲

pocksuppet 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

They don't want someone to piggyback Anthropic's Mythos to make their own Mythos with less effort than it cost Anthropic.

	▲	airstrike an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		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.
	▲	dannyw an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		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.