all 5 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 12 points 4 months ago

Please don't steal from what we stole, it's not fair!

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 4 months ago
    [–] 7 points 4 months ago

    "Hey! How dare you steal what we stole first!"

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago

    10/10 ragebait

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago*

    Put the Anthropic management in jail for mass scale financial fraud and copyright infringement already.

  • source
  • 31 comments in c/technology@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 59 points 4 months ago

    Anthropic, I mean this with the upmost sincerity:

    No one gives a fuck.

  • source
  • [–] 99 points 4 months ago

    "They've stolen our rightfully stolen data!", said the spokesman.

  • source
  • [–] 23 points 4 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 42 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    If your competitor can put out a model that functions really similarly to yours for $2 less per month, and your entire userbase can just leave and move to them... explain to me why investors would want to pump hundreds of billions into your business to be 'first to market'? That's a really dumb thing to admit for Anthropic.

    Who is 'first to 100 million users' is utterly irrelevant under a business model where your sole value is Intellectual Property (IP) and that IP can be "illicitly extracted" by a clever competitor without ever hacking into your nextwork or doing anything explicitly illegal.

    I've had to explain this to a lot of people who seem to think Anthropic/OpenAI are incredibly valuable companies because "they'll make money long-term so long as they keep being pumped full of it investment cash to be the first to earn a big userbase", but that just doesn't make sense. OpenAI owns no datacenters...zero. Theyre 100% IP. Anthropic "is building" some datacenters, but they exist on paper only so far, so they're also presently 100% IP.

    Can this obvious scam just collapse already so I can upgrade my PC without a personal loan?

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    I think your take is completely reasonable but I think the 'first to 100 million users' is actually noteworthy because if they can become entrenched and people become unwilling to learn anything else, they've won and can charge nearly whatever the fuck they want (at least in the medium term). See Microsoft and Adobe. They charge whatever they want for their subscription programs because what else are you going to do, use GIMP? Even in situations where the FLOSS alternative is legitimately good, a lot of people will still refuse to switch. I don't think Anthropic can survive long enough for them to become the only thing Susan from HR knows or is willing to use, but I think there's a path to profit somewhere here.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    There’s nothing to “learn”. Using one of these is in no way different than using the other.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Unless you start using fancy little features that let you do things the others don’t do quite as well.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

    No, because any cool feature will be immediatelly replicated everywhere.

    This isn't a real product. Just bullshit generator.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago

    That’s not exactly true. The implementation details around context management matter to the user a use case. It’s totally feasible for providers to go into different directions, especially if they’re hoping to target different subsections of the same market.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    See Microsoft and Adobe.

    Except Microsoft and Adobe never bankrupted a company by getting adopted. It was a tax that companies could afford since they were still rounding errors compared to labor.

    If the adoption of a tech can be measured as being roughly equal to higher than the labor expense of a company, that decision isn't going to be dictated by what Susan in HR knows.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 20 points 4 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 19 points 4 months ago* (1 child)

    Alibaba picking up Anthropic's fair use strategy?

    Edit: is there an argument for letting the US ruin its economy and environment to train all these models and then just swooping in before it turns into a mild madmaxian hellscape to distill and/or extract the knowledge? Beats having to do this on your own, doesn't it?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago

    Yeah. Any Co2/other climate change regressions that the US makes affect everyone globally, and while water use is local, its also as-needed, so post-collapse you have to use up all your water anyway.

    AI could use solely graywater/non-water cooling and renewable energies, and that's the answer, just takes slowing down, building specific and rigorous facilities, . Letting the US speed along just hurts everyone due to climate change.

    That and every major company economically depends on each other, and disconnecting from the US in a way that doesn't cause backlash also takes time.

    Fuck america but don't let them drill holes in the boat we're all riding.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 17 points 4 months ago

    Laws for thee

  • source
  • [–] 34 points 4 months ago

    Plagiarism machine plagiarizes plagiarism machine. Film at 11.

  • source
  • [–] 30 points 4 months ago

    Lol. Stupid thieving fucks whine that their stolen data gets copied?

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 4 months ago

    You know what they say, no honor among thieves.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 4 months ago

    "They can't just help themselves to all the data they can get their hands on because they feel entitled to it for training! Wait..."

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago

    It was not clear how exactly they extracted capabilities..using the service and making prompts?! If it was just that, that's bullshit. AI companies have no moat..besides trillion dollar investments.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago

    No honor among thieves.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago

    Chinese company caught brazenly copying

    Surprised_Pikachu.jpg

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Well then Alibaba needs to get better at it cause the Qwen models have kinda sucked in my experience.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Do they? I only use local models on my GPU and my experience is that Qwen3.6 is so much better than Google's Gemma 4. I have no comparison to big models, because I refuse to use those. But friends told me that Claude and Co are doing pretty dumb things too while frying the planet

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    I'm still on the side of treating AI development with more caution than less. So depending where you live this could be a very good thing or a very bad thing in the long haul.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    Didn't they stole also from Alibaba? I read somewhere that if you asked in Chinese to Claude opus 4.8 which model was using the api (the web service injects an hidden prompt with bias), it replied it was based on Alibaba qwen 3.6

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    It's literally in the name. Open fucking sesame 🤣.

  • source
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago

    They have pretty much lost already. The US will probably try to fight in some way, but they have a very little moat. Even if they actually "stole", it's not as if that Anthropic had the moral high ground here.

    Some chinese models like GLM 5.2, Kimi K2.7 Mimo V2.5, Deepseek V4 Pro and Minimax 3 cost close to nothing and have wild usage limits if you subscribe.

    You can also run these Chinese models on European infrastructure through Cortecs.ai or similar. And you have actually have privacy! Privacy + Cheap vs Expensive and slightly better.

    Opus 4.6 is almost 5€ in and 24€ out. Sonnet 4.6 is 3€ in and 15€ out. Minimax 3 is 0,3€ in and 1,7€ out.

    All frontier models are so good that the differenciator going forward is going to be price. The models keep improving, but there is a clear trend of diminishing returns.

  • source
  • 25 comments in c/piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com view that post
    [–] 89 points 4 months ago
    [–] 51 points 4 months ago

    They stole out fairly stolen content....

  • source
  • [–] 51 points 4 months ago

    Oh yes the classic thief crying about being robbed

  • source
  • [–] 27 points 4 months ago

    From an open source perspective, this is how things are supposed to work, humanity making progress by standing on each other's shoulders... Of course they want the rest of humanity to help them, with government subsidies, investment from our retirement funds, etc.

  • source
  • [–] 20 points 4 months ago

    "Illicit" huh? They can fuck right off with that, their models were illicit to begin with.

  • source
  • [–] 19 points 4 months ago*

    Alibaba : please Claude, tell me what you can do. No secrets please.

    Claude : I can do this.

    Alibaba : Nice. But how? I don't steal, it is only for research. Pretty please. No mistakes

    Claude : Here you go ...

    Anthropic : :O Attacks!!

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 4 months ago

    Ah yes, the classic tale "Ali baba and the 40 thieves"

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 4 months ago

    Steal from a thief and get 100 years of relief

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 4 months ago

    I thought it ceased to be yours when you train ai on it

    Right?

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 4 months ago

    Alien Vs Predator

    Whoever wins, we lose.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 4 months ago
    [–] 30 points 4 months ago (8 children)

    I know the US government and legal system will side with Anthropic, because that's what these fuckers do, but I hope they fuck off and, if they intend to escalate, China retaliates. These Silicon Valley companies are full of shit and full of themselves.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    It's not like the Chinese are any better. I want both sides to lose.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    They're a little better. Many of their models are open-source and can be run offline.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    there are no open source models. There are open weight models.

    No models make available the way in which they were produced, aka the source.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago* (3 children)

    Everything is open-source if you know assembler

    Weights are basically algorithm. It is not even obfuscated. Companies successfully produce derivative works from them, what is the problem?

    One does not require git history for any Foss project, the exact way the code was produced IA not the requirement, it is the reproducibility that matters.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    When I can train the ai on my own in the same way I can compile a program (yes I understand the huge difference in computing power necessary, that's not what I'm talking about) then I'll consider it equivalent.

    As far as I'm concerned open weights are effectively compiled code. I can technically modify it, but I cannot rearrange the base components that were used to create it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

    Even AI developers themselves cannot train AI in the same way as one compiles a program. Storing all the necessary data is just not feasible. To achieve results comparable to modern flagship models, one needs to obtain data in real time, use large amounts of generated data that is deleted after single use. And the training algorithm itself is not deterministic.

    And I still fail to see how this is any different from requiring a git commit history. There is an algorithm present - that's it. It has no other forms in which it can be presented.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 4 months ago

    Even if it's true, whacha gonna do about it? Call the cops?

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 4 months ago

    Stealing Acquired

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 4 months ago

    It reminds me of a case in my hometown where a second thief stole a stolen vehicle from the initial thief, so the latter went to the police to report it, which, of course, led to nothing but his arrest.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

    Anthropic is right! AIs trained without direct consent from the owners of the training material should be blacklisted!

    We demand that our governments criminalize all AIs developed without full permission for use of training material, in support of Anthropic!

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago