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

AWS Bedrock to require sharing data with Anthropic for Mythos and future models

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 274 posts

Re: AWS Bedrock to require sharing data with Anthropic for Mythos and future models

#161

Post by abofh »

jerf wrote: post #146
tyingq wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It will absolutely cause some non-trivial number of customers to shift their configs away from Anthropic.

Which will work for the several weeks it takes for the other commercial providers to follow suit. The tides are turning. AI companies are IPO'ing. They've gotten where they are by selling $5 bills for $1, to update the old VC adage. I think we can look forward to them rewriting the contracts, both literal and social, on AI going forward to capture a lot more of the value. Or, to put it in more HN-friendly terms, it m…

Bedrock supports many models. Open weights models aren't far behind, maybe a year, 18 months.

Given they could have done this with data residency rules being respected and chose not to suggests all I need to know - this is for Anthropics IPO, not for user safety

Re: AWS Bedrock to require sharing data with Anthropic for Mythos and future models

#162

Post by parineum »

disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #93
afavour wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For OpenAI GPT-5.4 and GPT-5.5, classifier-flagged traffic will be retained for up to 30 days for automated offline abuse detection. https://docs.aws.amazon.com/bedrock/latest/userguide/abuse-d...

That's different though. Anthropic want everything for 30 days, not just flagged prompts/interactions.

Why can't they flag everything?

Re: AWS Bedrock to require sharing data with Anthropic for Mythos and future models

#163

Post by dannyw »

Aurornis wrote: post #136
storus wrote: post #87

This smells like an advanced version of corporate espionage. Assuming most companies will use their AI in the future, this will be fed directly to an Echelon-like network that will be leaking "interesting info" to friendly parties, like the Boeing vs Airbus scandal that was first widely reported and then swept under the rug officially.

Why would a secret espionage program be partially publicized? If they were doing some secret espionage or government surveillance with the data, they would just do it all in secret.

When there is a precise and legally defined boundary (i.e. ZDR means your data with Bedrock stays within the Amazon security and legal boundary), it becomes significantly more difficult to hide full data egress; without alarm bells being raised / mechanisms being accidentally discovered.

When you have a black box that sends the full stream to Anthropic, then everything (including what actually happens with the data) stays on the Anthropic side.

It's much harder to hide egress/exfil-at-scale completely; even if we assume NSA-level kernel rootkits, someone's still gonna notice "hey, why is this pipe saturated even though `nload` looks normal.

It's much easier to hide what you do with the full data when you have explanations for why you're doing egress/exfil.

Re: AWS Bedrock to require sharing data with Anthropic for Mythos and future models

#165

Post by throw1234567891 »

pczy wrote: post #111

This policy applies across all providers. Here is the warning in Cursor: https://i.redd.it/7sfyker2ya6h1.png Note that Anthropic has committed not to train models on logged data, so I don’t understand some of the concerns here. What exactly is your threat model? That Anthropic would train models contrary to their terms of service? That you trust them enough not to log your data prior to this, but not enough to trust…

> Note that Anthropic has committed not to train models on logged data, so I don’t understand some of the concerns here. What exactly is your threat model?

First of all, will they respect that promise in the future? Because, you know… they already received your data and by some legal quirks they are already required to store it for so many years. “What’s your threat model”, uhh, sending confidential information to a third party.

It’s okay if you do this with your own personal property. But if you are working on client projects, what, are you going to start shipping customer data under nda without consent? Good luck in the court.

Re: AWS Bedrock to require sharing data with Anthropic for Mythos and future models

#166

Post by krzyk »

Torikul007 wrote: post #4

I understand the safety/misuse argument, but I wonder where enterprises will draw the line here. “30-day retention for advanced models” sounds reasonable in isolation, until you remember many teams are sending proprietary code, internal docs, or customer-sensitive context through these systems.

Yeah, this is quite concerning.

And FedRamp has some issues with data being sent out.

Our corp doesn't allow usage of local models because of concern about potential "agent sends out code to the net" issues.

Re: AWS Bedrock to require sharing data with Anthropic for Mythos and future models

#167

Post by Hizonner »

cobolcomesback wrote: post #109
OtherShrezzing wrote: post #27

This is odd behaviour, and provides some evidence that Anthropic isn't being managed by serious people. With this policy across AWS/GH/Zed/etc, they're taking their massive lead in enterprise/govt sales and handing it to any competitor who can serve a model anywhere near these capabilities with a modestly nice UI.

Every one of the competitors capable of a similar model have been salivating for a long time at the idea of consensual data sharing. Anthropic just opened the door for everyone to do the same thing without having to deal with being the first to do so. My bet is that OpenAI etc’s next model will have these same requirements. Ever since the Mythos announcement it’s been clear that we’re heading towards a future where S…

"Consensual"?

Re: AWS Bedrock to require sharing data with Anthropic for Mythos and future models

#168

Post by Hizonner »

calgoo wrote: post #127
cobolcomesback wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every one of the competitors capable of a similar model have been salivating for a long time at the idea of consensual data sharing. Anthropic just opened the door for everyone to do the same thing without having to deal with being the first to do so. My bet is that OpenAI etc’s next model will have these same requirements. Ever since the Mythos announcement it’s been clear that we’re heading towards a future where S…

No, we are unhappy because there is no guarantee that my corporate documents wont be shared or trained on. We are already paying plus for using bedrock instead of the API version from Anthropic, so now there is no reason to use bedrock anymore. This whole thing about this model being too powerful to share is just the usual BS. Is an advanced model that dont have guardrails, just like the models that have been shared…

... but you were silent when they did it to consumers...

Re: AWS Bedrock to require sharing data with Anthropic for Mythos and future models

#169

Post by doctorpangloss »

pczy wrote: post #111

This policy applies across all providers. Here is the warning in Cursor: https://i.redd.it/7sfyker2ya6h1.png Note that Anthropic has committed not to train models on logged data, so I don’t understand some of the concerns here. What exactly is your threat model? That Anthropic would train models contrary to their terms of service? That you trust them enough not to log your data prior to this, but not enough to trust…

here's how they train on your data:

an inference request comes in

claude fable RESTful API service does the stuff, some backend systems run the prefill and batch decode, and your conversation is cached for 5 minutes in some prefix cache.

the request is also sent to claude paraphraser, which does almost exactly the same thing as the compactor and rewrites your conversation.

then they record the paraphrased conversation and train on that. it keeps the salient parts of the conversation, like whatever internal knowledge you have, and disposes of anything that could have been correlated with the earlier conversation, which is easy to do because verification is a string comparison.

Post reply on HN