[flagged]
Whatever happened to honor among theives? What is this world coming to..
Alibaba to ban Claude Code in workplace over alleged backdoor risks, source says
91–100 of 299 posts
Re: Alibaba to ban Claude Code in workplace over alleged backdoor risks, source says
#92I got curious and asked my Chinese friends, and they gave me a Reddit link[1]. It looks like it's about location data collection, and they suggested that might be the reason for the issue. [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1ujila1/anthropic...
There was a big thread about it here the other day. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48734373
[deleted]
Re: Alibaba to ban Claude Code in workplace over alleged backdoor risks, source says
#93All remote AI are a massive security risk for individuals/companies/governments that may be targeted by the US government. It is likely that the US will get a live feed from each AI provider that they are inspecting in real time to identity things of interest, terrorist attacks or foreign government planning or even foreign companies competitive to key US companies. It will give them access to the though process in t…
[deleted]
Re: Alibaba to ban Claude Code in workplace over alleged backdoor risks, source says
#94i gonna ask: how can they still use claude? i thought all users in china are banned
one possibility:
iproyal.com Oxylabs.io
https://krebsonsecurity.com/2025/10/aisuru-botnet-shifts-fro...
Re: Alibaba to ban Claude Code in workplace over alleged backdoor risks, source says
#95[flagged]
Remember how Kim Dotcom got destroyed for criminal copyright infringement? One would think the big tech CEOs would face the same fate, that police officers would rappel down helicopters, storm their mansions and bring them out in cuffs. Instead the AI companies reached these absurd settlements with publishers that made a mockery out of all the previous copyright enforcement victims.
Reminds me, did the AI companies redistribute that copyrighted material to others and make their money that way? Did Kim use the copyrighted material to generate something novel from it?
copyright law literally says something isn’t infringement if it is a novel transformation. I get the jokes and criticism about AI companies fighting and complaining about competitors distilling, but this is a much weirder comparison.
Re: Alibaba to ban Claude Code in workplace over alleged backdoor risks, source says
#96Snowden files revealed NSA collect everything they can.
Of-course USA is collecting everything, not just from China but everyone.
And same with every one else.
Re: Alibaba to ban Claude Code in workplace over alleged backdoor risks, source says
#97[flagged]
Remember how Kim Dotcom got destroyed for criminal copyright infringement? One would think the big tech CEOs would face the same fate, that police officers would rappel down helicopters, storm their mansions and bring them out in cuffs. Instead the AI companies reached these absurd settlements with publishers that made a mockery out of all the previous copyright enforcement victims.
Remember Aaron Swartz who did something that just pales compared to what Dario Amodei, Zuckerberg-Mr-Torrent and Sam Altman did.
Re: Alibaba to ban Claude Code in workplace over alleged backdoor risks, source says
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Translation: Alibaba will continue distillation attacks using accounts that aren't directly attributable to it's own corporate infrastructure. What's a "distillation attack"? How is it different from simply distillation?
The target doesn't want to be distilled.
> The target doesn't want to be distilled.
So?
Fraudsters don't want to be jailed, their victims don't want to be scammed, employees don't want to be laid off, etc.
What the target wants is irrelevant - what society wants as enforced by laws is what is relevant, and as the leading AI providers have demonstrated, simply grabbing other people's copyrighted stuff for learning purposes is perfectly fine!
If they already think this practice is fine, why would I believe that their concerns about this are real?
Re: Alibaba to ban Claude Code in workplace over alleged backdoor risks, source says
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
Remember how Kim Dotcom got destroyed for criminal copyright infringement? One would think the big tech CEOs would face the same fate, that police officers would rappel down helicopters, storm their mansions and bring them out in cuffs. Instead the AI companies reached these absurd settlements with publishers that made a mockery out of all the previous copyright enforcement victims.
Reminds me, did the AI companies redistribute that copyrighted material to others and make their money that way? Did Kim use the copyrighted material to generate something novel from it? copyright law literally says something isn’t infringement if it is a novel transformation. I get the jokes and criticism about AI companies fighting and complaining about competitors distilling, but this is a much weirder comparison.
Now you just have to explain this:
"Anthropic settles with authors in first-of-its-kind AI copyright infringement lawsuit" - https://www.npr.org/2025/09/05/nx-s1-5529404/anthropic-settl...
Re: Alibaba to ban Claude Code in workplace over alleged backdoor risks, source says
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
Remember how Kim Dotcom got destroyed for criminal copyright infringement? One would think the big tech CEOs would face the same fate, that police officers would rappel down helicopters, storm their mansions and bring them out in cuffs. Instead the AI companies reached these absurd settlements with publishers that made a mockery out of all the previous copyright enforcement victims.
Remember how people used to justify their own personal software piracy with arguments like "information wants to be free", "no one stole anything, you still have the data", "I was never going to buy it anyway", and "copyright should be abolished?" > Instead the AI companies reached these absurd settlements with publishers that made a mockery out of all the previous copyright enforcement victims. Isn't that at least s…
> Remember how people used to justify their own personal software piracy
A courtesy. There was never any need to justify it.
> Isn't that at least something?
Yes, it's a joke. Why do they get to infringe copyrights with impunity while normal people get destroyed? Either go after them like the copyright industry always does and punish them properly, or abolish copyright straight up. This "rules for thee but not for me" nonsense is straight up disgusting.
> How many people pirating software ever settled with the companies they "victimized?"
Too many to list. Also, nobody is victimizing billion dollar corporations.