Live data from Hacker News

Our position on open-weights models

anthropic.com

831–840 of 1001 posts

Re: Our position on open-weights models

#831
These globalists were happy outsourcing manufacturing and software development. They are now angry that they failed to secure their IP, which was already based on dubious extraction of the collective works of human IP.

You can't have it both ways. Either it's fine to outsource to China, fine to use H1Bs to undercut US talent, or, foreign governments are strategically positioning and their espionage is a threat to America.

Re: Our position on open-weights models

#835
post #602
post #207

Someone who until yesterday did not seem bothered by his technology being possibly used to bomb elementary girls school in another country seems to suddenly care about the repression of citizens in yet another country. No, we don't buy your virtue signaling. And we certainly don't need your better-than-thou opinions on this year's "nightmare scenarios".

The bombing of the school was horrible, but it was a mistake. I could see essentially the opposite argument: Anthropic should be more involved as to prevent mistakes in the future with better technology. Imagine Claude asking the decision makers at CENTCOM "this looks like a school, are you sure you want this added as a target?"

a mistake that might be caused by the fact no one cares. an avoidable mistake.

Re: Our position on open-weights models

#836

This argument might make a modicum of sense if the US hasn’t spent the last 2 years establishing itself as a bigger enemy of the west that China.

Being in the UK, I'm far more worried about the US than China right now. At least until the next election cycle is resolved. Hopefully, Trump won't start a civil war over not being allowed to stand for a third term. Hopefully.

Re: Our position on open-weights models

#837

Anthropic/Dario getting a lot of hate in this thread, but the argument he makes is rational if you believe for one second that AI is important to national security and that it can, or will soon be incredibly dangerous is misused. People pointing out that this position benefits his company might be overly reductionist in how they think the world works. I believe Dario and Anthropic about their belief that AI safety is…

Don't be so naive. He only wants a monopoly and a massive IPO.

Re: Our position on open-weights models

#840
post #196

Schrödinger's China at once is an evil entity looking to use AI for their own nefarious purposes yet also willing to cooperate with their main competitor to prevent other actors (who??) from achieving similar goals (all while under a chip embargo too!!) The reality is much less confusing: Anthropic CEO does not wish for models with similar (or greater) capabilities compared to his own closed and overpriced ones to be…

Regular distilled models show capacity gaps and overfitting that open-weight models don't anymore I think. This focus on distillation as "more compute-efficient" (i.e. cheaper) seems to rather be an excuse for bad (or bubble) investment, fixed hardware dependency and lack of interest in research of efficient compute. Which also shows as climate and sustainability impact.

Nvidia signed the open-weight model letter and Europe doesn't have better models either, so chips don't seem like the issue either. I guess good old performance optimisation is just not _cool_ anymore. So they use the same argument as politicians arguing "cheap products" are why tariffs are needed; when instead it's mismanagement.

Another HN user wrote the other day "live by the sword, die by the sword".

Post reply on HN