Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“Too dangerous to release” or just too expensive?

kingy.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 189 posts

Re: “Too dangerous to release” or just too expensive?

#21

Post by [deleted] »

cbg0 wrote: post #18
wood_spirit wrote: post #9

My thinking is that if it really was super duper then Anthropic could charge eye watering amounts and have willing customers and set up expectations going forward that SOTA costs a lot to use. That they don’t suggests that really it is only incrementally better than Opus 4.7 and that the market won’t bear a price increase that makes it economical to serve let alone profit from serving. So the cynical me imagines exec…

They announced the pricing when they released preview: $25/$125 per million input/output tokens. I have no doubt they're already selling it to select customers.

[deleted]

Re: “Too dangerous to release” or just too expensive?

#22

Post by whyenot »

It's probably a little of both: dangerous and expensive. This article makes a good case that the cost is at least part of the reason.

I wish the article could have been a lot tighter and shorter. This is not earth shattering information that requires a New Yorker length piece of investigative journalism.

Re: “Too dangerous to release” or just too expensive?

#23

Post by upmind »

ed_elliott_asc wrote: post #12

It all sounds a bit too marketing-ey to me “we have this amazing model that is too good to release” but the goal is still AGI? Ok right.

The goal for anthropic is safe AGI. A) this model is dangerous in the hands of consumers. B)They do not want China to train on these models.

Re: “Too dangerous to release” or just too expensive?

#25

Post by vrganj »

upmind wrote: post #23
ed_elliott_asc wrote: post #12

It all sounds a bit too marketing-ey to me “we have this amazing model that is too good to release” but the goal is still AGI? Ok right.

The goal for anthropic is safe AGI. A) this model is dangerous in the hands of consumers. B)They do not want China to train on these models.

"Safe" for who?

Re: “Too dangerous to release” or just too expensive?

#26

Post by repelsteeltje »

estearum wrote: post #17
tomaytotomato wrote: post #14

AI has always been dangerous, but not existentially dangerous. Mythos is dangerous but it's not going to Skynet us. Just the same as the military drone using some sort of OpenCV library and target prioritisation loop isn't going to turn evil on us.

Yeah we have literally no examples of more intelligent beings accidentally or purposefully wiping out less intelligent beings. Any time such a scenario could have conceivably happened, the less intelligent beings were able to foresee the methods, mechanisms, and motivations of the more intelligent beings and were able to counteract it.

I get the sarcasm, but what about Neanderthals versus Homo Sapiens?

Re: “Too dangerous to release” or just too expensive?

#27

Post by esperent »

upmind wrote: post #23
ed_elliott_asc wrote: post #12

It all sounds a bit too marketing-ey to me “we have this amazing model that is too good to release” but the goal is still AGI? Ok right.

The goal for anthropic is safe AGI. A) this model is dangerous in the hands of consumers. B)They do not want China to train on these models.

Drink that Anthropic coolade up!

Re: “Too dangerous to release” or just too expensive?

#30

Post by timpera »

angra_mainyu wrote: post #11
djvu97 wrote: post #3

> Resource Limit Is Reached The website is temporarily unable to service your request as it exceeded resource limit. Please try again later. I guess it was too dangerous to even read the article

The HN hug of death

It's somehow nice to see an old-school HN hug of death once in a while, it has become a rare sight since most links are now to big platforms or to websites behind Cloudflare.
Post reply on HN