>Who is still using Anthropic seriously

Too many people, hence all the friction and cost.

It's pretty clear that there is massive unmet demand for AI, and compute cannot keep up. So you can pretty reliably dial in the "free compute for inference" situation for any given lab based on their pricing and friction tactics.

Anthropic/Google getting stuffed (Google is an odd case here)

OAI doing alrightish

Grok/Meta basically doing giveaways

Chinese models trying to fill vacancies on 3rd party compute

▲

hmokiguess 5 hours ago | parent [-]

It does seem to be that way, though, I'm very curious to what capacity and how they are using Anthropic.

I suspect they just have loads of subscription users, probably many enterprise seats, but I sort of doubt there are agentic pipelines built on their metered pricing in the same scale as they may have subscription seats.

	▲	WarmWash 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It also depends on how much compute you want to devote to training. If Anthropic is training heavy and compute constrained, users will feel it. I think the whole pentagon thing really cast Anthropic into the spotlight, and their aesthetic is pure marketing excellence. It is the "trendy" AI to use. However on the backend, they did not have the compute available to serve everyone, especially since they seem to lean towards massive parameter models.