541–550 of 1001 posts
it took a long time for this to actually go out. for what id expect to be an in memory switch, 2-3h is a while
I think we should see this as simply silly behavior by a government. Export control is not an effective tool for controlling a consumer facing technology developers everywhere want to use (see:VPNs) so there was no good faith policy justification for imposing an export control. This is an administration that seems to be keeping track of who its friends are and aren't, and likes to be the center of every story. They a…
I am saying this probably is "silly behavior by a government" and it is a milestone that points towards what the future may look like. Why can't it be both? It's easy to wave this aside as the current administration playing political games. But I don't think there is any reason to assume that the current era of open availability of models is going to continue indefinitely. Do you think that Chinese labs will continue…
Yes.
I think the Chinese government either already has, or will soon, grasp that if they train the models that people use they dictate what people believe (at least around the margins where that's malleable), and they will happily throw resources at that.
And simultaneously that the only way they can actually get everyone to use their models is if it's possible for us to run them on our own hardware.
(This isn't exactly a utopian view of the future)
I’ve never used Claude. Why not? Because Claude’s free tier was even worse than Grok! DeepSeek’s free tier is much better. Also, the fact that Claude was hyped on HN like Rust and Go made me suspicious. Why the hard sell and the non-stop promotional effort? I’m mostly interested in scientific programming, the Python and C and C++ seems to work fine, and oh look, Julia! And LLMs? I’m just going to run open source mode…
Looks like a back door attempt to force KYC (foreign nationals, lol) to prepare for more discrimination in the digital space with a side effect to benefit Peter Thiels ventures and shovel more data into Palantir for use in the upcoming midterm push. See also https://www.404media.co/fcc-wants-to-kill-burner-phones-by-f... Digital yellow star by exclusion from digital life for foreigners. Remember when tech companies w…
The objective isn’t national security because we already know how that goes https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-54695598
There’s no path to compliance and the decision is arbitrary - the model capabilities are not officially assessed by any visible criteria and it prevents export of models based on these non criteria forward.
All days before IPO.
When you spend a lot of time telling people how dangerous your products are, people who have the power to keep dangerous products off the market might listen. Especially if those people aren't presently very bright, and are already mad at you for not helping them achieve their unrelated authoritarian goals. I do not think this is somehow a 3D chess move by Anthropic. They are not masterminds, even if they'd really li…
This fits the model established with RSA, PGP, and the Sony PS3. They were export controlled for quite some time. I don't think there was ever any actual danger with any of those things, and today it feels especially quaint, but they fit the model of "corporation makes wild-ass claims of superiority of their tech and USGov takes them at their word."
My big problem with this is that it's applied so narrowly to Anthropic. This should be levied against OpenAI, Google, and xAI as well. There is systemic risk with generative AI being used for deep fakes and other propaganda generation at scale that needs to be addressed.
But unfortunately, that's not what is happening here. What's happening here is a political hit job. There's one of two things happening: either USG has been roped into burying a competitor for (OpenAI/xAI/whatever), or it's been roped into creating a superiority narrative for Anthropic, such that in two years when this admin is finally ousted, Anthropic gets to enjoy a floodgate of new attention as the new regime bulk CTRL+Zs everything Trump's lackeys did. It might even be both at the same time, given the connections of the major investors. This all could get well be a stirring of the pot to see what comes out.
I can't decide which is worse.
They told us this model is dangerous, and now they are complaining that someone with more guns than them said releasing something dangerous is not okay?
I think we should see this as simply silly behavior by a government. Export control is not an effective tool for controlling a consumer facing technology developers everywhere want to use (see:VPNs) so there was no good faith policy justification for imposing an export control. This is an administration that seems to be keeping track of who its friends are and aren't, and likes to be the center of every story. They a…