Live data from Hacker News

Anthropic requires 30 day data retention for Fable and Mythos

support.claude.com

31–40 of 330 posts

Re: Anthropic requires 30 day data retention for Fable and Mythos

#31
post #12

the real risk is using it at all as you are already sending them your data. If you are ok with that, then this retention/review seems ok.

From a personal use perspective yes, the big issue here is enterprise and existing contracts as surely most companies will have signed zero retention.

Re: Anthropic requires 30 day data retention for Fable and Mythos

#32
post #13

A startup that uses agentic coding tools such as Claude Code or Codex is packaging up their entire codebase and sending it directly to their LM provider. Depending on their product, they might be sending it directly to a potential competitor. Odd times we are living in!

people over-rate how much software/IP is useful in running a successful business. There are genuinely very few IP in this world that needs to be protected. Everyone else is running stupid CRUD apps They also over index fear of LargeCo stealing IP from SmallCo. In fact, LargeCo is typically more scared about even the possibility of any product team looking at competitor internals due to lawsuits.

> people over-rate how much software/IP is useful in running a successful business

Indeed, by a couple trillions...

Re: Anthropic requires 30 day data retention for Fable and Mythos

#33
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the same way that using Gmail and Dropbox and iCloud and Notion violates it. (Which IANAL but for most NDAs would be not at all.)

I never had an NDA permit such usage.

Your NDAs prohibit emailing a colleague about the e.g. project, or discussing it in a Slack DM with the client, or tracking progress on it in JIRA? You have to do NDA’d work exclusively with local tools or end-to-end encryption? Those are some difficult NDAs!

Re: Anthropic requires 30 day data retention for Fable and Mythos

#34

It is actually worse than that. It is at least 30 days. There is an "almost" that is doing a ton of heavy lifting here "deletion after 30 days in almost all cases". My read of that is they can hang onto data for as long as they want, even if they usually won't. And "all traffic" with an agentic harness is basically your entire codebase you work on. > We will require 30-day retention for all traffic on Mythos-class mo…

Half of my customers will drop them right away, and the other half, after I explain to them what this means.

Re: Anthropic requires 30 day data retention for Fable and Mythos

#35

It is actually worse than that. It is at least 30 days. There is an "almost" that is doing a ton of heavy lifting here "deletion after 30 days in almost all cases". My read of that is they can hang onto data for as long as they want, even if they usually won't. And "all traffic" with an agentic harness is basically your entire codebase you work on. > We will require 30-day retention for all traffic on Mythos-class mo…

[dead]

Re: Anthropic requires 30 day data retention for Fable and Mythos

#36
post #12

the real risk is using it at all as you are already sending them your data. If you are ok with that, then this retention/review seems ok.

There were two (expensive) exceptions / alternatives so far: Bedrock and Vertex. Their Zero Data Retention was in fact contractually enforced. Now it is all f...d because of these morons at Anthropic. For now I am better off just using DS via their API.

This is just a tragic moment for Tech. We just killed AI privacy. OpenAI already follows this trend and others will do too.

The only hope now is ... tada .. Mistral LOL

Re: Anthropic requires 30 day data retention for Fable and Mythos

#37

It is actually worse than that. It is at least 30 days. There is an "almost" that is doing a ton of heavy lifting here "deletion after 30 days in almost all cases". My read of that is they can hang onto data for as long as they want, even if they usually won't. And "all traffic" with an agentic harness is basically your entire codebase you work on. > We will require 30-day retention for all traffic on Mythos-class mo…

Even worse when you git push something Microsoft gets all your code!

That is why, for the last five years I have been checking in with them, code with some of the most atrocious quality. So far...its working....

Re: Anthropic requires 30 day data retention for Fable and Mythos

#38
post #16
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s exactly what my employer had communicated. It will not be allowed.

Step 1: Find all companies which refuses/bans to use SOTA models from irrational fear. Step 2: Use SOTA models to copy them and crush them Step 3: Profit. (Yes, not every business is easily replicable, but you sure can find some)

This. And AI labs seem to be above IP / Copyright law and absolutely nothing will happen to them when they grab all the data and package it up.

Re: Anthropic requires 30 day data retention for Fable and Mythos

#39
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Step 1: Find all companies which refuses/bans to use SOTA models from irrational fear. Step 2: Use SOTA models to copy them and crush them Step 3: Profit. (Yes, not every business is easily replicable, but you sure can find some)

Can you name a single example of a business that has been replaced by another business leveraging LLMs to copy and "crush" their software?

Pretty much any Chinese business. (Except takeouts and laundries)

Re: Anthropic requires 30 day data retention for Fable and Mythos

#40
post #20

It is actually worse than that. It is at least 30 days. There is an "almost" that is doing a ton of heavy lifting here "deletion after 30 days in almost all cases". My read of that is they can hang onto data for as long as they want, even if they usually won't. And "all traffic" with an agentic harness is basically your entire codebase you work on. > We will require 30-day retention for all traffic on Mythos-class mo…

How were they not already auditing access to customer data?

They were not keeping it beyond the timeframe necessary for the model to process it, so there wasn't access there to audit.
Post reply on HN