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

Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

861–870 of 1001 posts

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#861

Post by TZubiri »

gaiagraphia wrote: post #115

This is great for competition! Chinese vendors offering a cheaper solution = what economics told me the free market was all about. I also learnt that Anthropic should get better at what they do if they want to compete. If not, somebody else will win. Or does this not apply to huge US corporations any more?

Nuance please.

They are:

1- breaking terms of conditions of the service

2- getting banned and creating thousands of accounts to break the conditions of the service at scale

3- using VPNs and proxies (possibly residential) to mask their network origin and identity

4- Using potentially fake names to sign up

5- Using different credit cards?

Fraud on so many levels, a lot of the infrastructure and modus operandi is what cybercriminals use, these are attackers man, whether you like the victim or not, and whether you think it's poetic or not, I recommend compartimentalizing and just trying to gauge whether an act is wrong or not in itself.

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#862

Post by jwang987 »

tristanj wrote: post #25

Here's what is happening: Chinese resellers are offering Claude tokens at 70-90% below official Anthropic API prices. They achieve this by reselling capacity from pooled Claude Max accounts, payments fraud, and also reselling the model output & reasoning chains to various Chinese labs. They are subsidizing model access in exchange for user logs and reasoning traces, which they then sell as training data, allowing the…

they even resell GPT codex usage at 1~5% API costs. OpenAI has 1-month free trial promo in some regions, and they harvest free accounts in a large scale. I have a wechat contact that offers 98% off for GPT 5.5 and he's still profitable

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#863

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

ivanovm wrote: post #823
_fat_santa wrote: post #817

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If anything these models should be compelled to be public since they have been trained off public data I'm starting to come around to this idea TBH. For a while my position was: "these companies have invested billions into training these models, therefore they should be able to control them and profit off them" but looking deeper at where they got their training data, my view is starting to shift. IMHO I feel like…

labs invest multiple billion dollars a year each in private data, and that number is growing. internet training data is not where frontier capabilities come from, this view is outdated

> internet training data is not where frontier capabilities come from

We 100% would not be at the current progress without it, though. And it's not like they only train on this once. They keep training on all the internet data PLUS the private data. Private data only (probably) wouldn't work, as learning the base regularities of language takes a lot of weights.

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#864

Post by [deleted] »

onetrickwolf wrote: post #760

“Distillation attack” are we joking here. If anything these models should be compelled to be public since they have been trained off public data. What an absurd overreach to call this an attack. It’s clear they are scapegoating national security and China at this point to build an anti-competitive moat. I generally really like Anthropic’s work and models but stuff like this scares me for the future. We are positionin…

[deleted]

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#865

Post by freeopinion »

Wallace Shawn was in on the joke when he expertly delivered the original line. It seems like Anthropic has spent years and billions of dollars to recreate the entire scene.

But what will become of the princess in Anthropic's recreation?

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#866

Post by flowerlad »

calgoo wrote: post #855
flowerlad wrote: post #829

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should Google search index be forced to be public too?

Honestly, yes it should in some form. If their index contains the actual data from the sites, and they are making that information public in one way or another, then it should be available as a downloadable dataset.

How far can we take this?

Should Boeing airplane designs be public domain since the underlying math is public domain?

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#867

Post by nightski »

threethirtytwo wrote: post #856
_fat_santa wrote: post #817

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If anything these models should be compelled to be public since they have been trained off public data I'm starting to come around to this idea TBH. For a while my position was: "these companies have invested billions into training these models, therefore they should be able to control them and profit off them" but looking deeper at where they got their training data, my view is starting to shift. IMHO I feel like…

I'm not taking sides here but this situation is not so black and white and it has always been the darker side of capitalism. The concept of Intellectual property exists not because it's fair but because it creates incentive to make said "intellectual property" exist. If intellectual property can be instantly copied by a competitor... why would I spend a dime to even create such a thing? I want to profit off of what I…

That intellectual property argument goes both ways. The model might not exist without protection, but it also would not exist without the data.

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#870

Post by crispyambulance »

ipaddr wrote: post #756
crispyambulance wrote: post #739

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The standard of neutrality that people here pretend to require from news organizations is not even remotely realistic. It was a timely story from Reuters. They do fast news feeds, like APnews. Could it have been better or more accurate? Sure, they could have gone into why distillation may or may not be seen as "an attack". But then it would have been a more involved story, defeating the purpose of a news feed. The Re…

Good enough slop to serve the masses. Doesn't need to be truthful because its fast? Why even both to write anything?

Yes. It was good enough to communicate that news item.

Did Alibaba perform "an attack" or were they taking advantage of resources and going beyond Anthropic's terms of service? Didn't Anthropic do the same kinds of things when building their models?

These are all interesting questions, but they don't have to be addressed in full by a news blurb about a letter Anthropic wrote to some senators.

Post reply on HN