760
Anthropic confirms new Claude Code limits to prevent game cloning — users report Opus 5.5 is also actively blocking reverse engineering tasks (www.tomshardware.com)
submitted 1 week ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
174 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

My how fast the AI tech bros move to protect corporations but don't move to protect the average coder, artists, writers.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 162 points 1 week ago (17 children)

So they took out two of the most useful things that LLMs can do.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 17 child comments
    •
  • [–] 149 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    Yes, apparently they’re suddenly worried that stealing other people’s work—which is their business model—might backfire on them. I assume this is a measure intended to give the impression—in the face of one of the countless lawsuits against Anthropic—that they’re actually taking licensing or intellectual property rights seriously. I can’t think of any other explanation, because Anthropic simply can’t afford to have questions raised about where the training data used by their models actually comes from.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 26 points 6 days ago (1 child)

    Pulling up the stolen ladder before anyone can steal it to use to steal more stuff while it's still enforceable to do so.

    Mabey just make all ladders illegal, unless you have a government contracted monopoly.

    The entire idea of copyright is going to be tested at many levels, and most people don't even understand why yet.

    Interesting times.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 4 points 6 days ago*

    Government contracted monopoly

    You mean like when that town tried to force an xAI data center to not use methane turbines, and they got shut down by the government because the military was allegedly using Grok?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 72 points 6 days ago (12 children)

    No, they just enabled Chinese LLMs to be the forefront of reverse engineering. Because people will do what they want to do.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 37 points 6 days ago (5 children)

    No, they just enabled Chinese LLMs to be the forefront of reverse engineering. Because people will do what they want to do.

    Their goal is simple... everything they are doing right now is striving to make the US ban individual hardware.

    Chinese models are open, anyone can get them... stopping the flow of data on private computers is impossible. Hardware however is getting more expensive, hardware manufacturers are already deciding to move out of the consumer market on their own. The US government is already establishing laws to prevent shipping foreign hardware into the country.

    Altman's giving the game away when he does this "it's so sad that all this ram is sitting around in people's home computers unappreciated when it could do so much more in a data center".

    The idea is to sell the message "AI is out of the bag, and it's world ending technology. Basically they are going to imply that the guardrails in their data centers are the only thing that's preventing all AIs from destroying the software industry, and teaching teenagers to build bombs and hacking the CIA, and the only possible response would be to stop all direct to consumer hardware sales with anything more than the bare minimum needed to stream a PC out of a data center.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

    This is all pretty obvious and I agree. They can no longer protect their imaginary property if they allow it to be ran in your computer's memory or stored on your computers hard drive.

    The cat is definitely out of the bag, as in their own AI models are making them obselete. The race to make money before the end is what motivates them. They will ride the roller coaster to our societal demise because they only care about money. These people shouldn't be in charge of a small fast food restaurant let alone multi-billion dollar companies.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 6 days ago* (1 child)

    If private hardware becoming scare would send America back to the stone age, completely choke technological progress.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 5 points 6 days ago

    probably, but don't you know, everything in the cloud is the FuTuRe!! owning things yourself is the way of the past, it's like physical disks you can resell or something.

    Sad thing with the exception of price, it's probably not that far off that most average people's usages will be similar. but yeah the idea of paying by the hour or cpu grade etc... for a computer is going to suck... and be far more expensive for gamers, hobbyists etc...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 6 days ago (1 child)

    world ending technology.

    Read that as "democratic and free word ending", and it's on purpose as they saw cyberpunk and wanted to become a mega-corporation that rules the world too.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 3 points 6 days ago (5 children)

    Just ran into Qwen's version of guardrails myself, and am quite annoyed. Guess I'm gonna have to look into abliterated models next.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 6 days ago (4 children)

    Oh, abliterated models are awesome! Just be aware that they’re a little too agentic at times. Once they start ignoring guardrails, they happily keep ignoring them!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 5 days ago (3 children)

    My concern at the moment is I've heard some of them have performance issues due to the abliteration process. What's your experience with that?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 5 days ago (2 children)

    Like, TTFT? Or speed of tokens? Or something else? BTW what was the gate you initially hit with Qwen?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child)

    Some abliterated models had lower reliability and quality, I heard. Is that still an issue, or has the dev community figured out how to avoid those pitfalls?

    Was spitballing about various ideas, and occasionally Qwen would go all Chinese-ethical on me, no using open systems outside of stated design, no avoiding govt blocklists, etc etc.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 5 days ago

    depends on what their base model is. Most abliterated models start off with an already quantized model, so depending on the type and level of quantization, you've already lost some capability. Plus, I think there are two types of abliteration, so ymmv.

    My current go tos, in order are -

    • eriktonon/gemma4-uncensored:26b-a4b
    • orcarouter/Qwen3.8-27B-Uncensored:iq2_xxs
    • hf.co/HauhauCS/Gemma-4-E4B-Uncensored-HauhauCS-Aggressive:Q6_K_P

    I've tried and hated - hf.co/DavidAU/L3.1-Dark-Reasoning-Dark-Planet-Hermes-R1-Uncensored-Horror-Imatrix-MAX-8B-GGUF:latest

    If you're set on trying out Qwen, I highlugh recomment orcarouter's models. Very well done and they start off with a good base model - well, actually now that I think about it, Qwen3.8 basically has one base model - the 27b one, right? So that's that.

    I like the Gemma-4-E4B for speed for response, and HauhauCS has done a good job of abliterating the model appropriately. However, it's nothing compared to the A4B models, so if your hardware can take it, go for A4B over E4B always.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent