121–130 of 274 posts
This is odd behaviour, and provides some evidence that Anthropic isn't being managed by serious people. With this policy across AWS/GH/Zed/etc, they're taking their massive lead in enterprise/govt sales and handing it to any competitor who can serve a model anywhere near these capabilities with a modestly nice UI.
I don’t think there are other models near Fable’s capabilities.
This policy applies across all providers. Here is the warning in Cursor: https://i.redd.it/7sfyker2ya6h1.png Note that Anthropic has committed not to train models on logged data, so I don’t understand some of the concerns here. What exactly is your threat model? That Anthropic would train models contrary to their terms of service? That you trust them enough not to log your data prior to this, but not enough to trust…
It doesn't really matter how much you happen trust another party. In the regulatory world it only matters what contracts they will sign that guarantee their compliance. We do have those with AWS, we don't with Anthropic. If Anthropic physically captures the data, they just moved themselves outside the boundary of parties who we can do business with. Unless they want to sign a contract and implement all the corresponding compliance measures. They are insane if they think that's a good deal for them to do all that right now in every jurisdiction where AWS operates, when AWS has already spent a decade building it up.
This is odd behaviour, and provides some evidence that Anthropic isn't being managed by serious people. With this policy across AWS/GH/Zed/etc, they're taking their massive lead in enterprise/govt sales and handing it to any competitor who can serve a model anywhere near these capabilities with a modestly nice UI.
Every one of the competitors capable of a similar model have been salivating for a long time at the idea of consensual data sharing. Anthropic just opened the door for everyone to do the same thing without having to deal with being the first to do so. My bet is that OpenAI etc’s next model will have these same requirements. Ever since the Mythos announcement it’s been clear that we’re heading towards a future where S…
Cool. Everybody is doing it. Doesn’t make it right or make it good for the people. Everyone should complain and help others wake up that Anthropic isn’t the “good guys” like their narrative in Feb/march led so many to believe.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think that’s by AWS though. For Fable you need to flip an account wide flag that says “I want to share my prompts with the model vendor.”
The Fable announcement page on the Anthropic site says this data sharing will be applied regardless of the sharing setting of the company account. https://www.anthropic.com/news/claude-fable-5-mythos-5#a-new... --- ## A new data retention policy Finally, we’re making a change to the way we handle business customer data for Fable 5, Mythos 5, and future models with similar or higher capability levels. We will require…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At least it stays in your GCP environment, AWS disclosure says that it will leave your data privacy and security boundary.
That Claude support page says the exact same thing about AWS (“retained data stays in your AWS environment”). AWS’s docs say differently, though, so it seems one of them has incorrect documentation. I wouldn’t necessarily trust the Claude docs to be correct even regarding GCP until some of this is ironed out. edit: Google’s own docs also say zero data retention isn’t possible with Fable and your data will be retained…
This is odd behaviour, and provides some evidence that Anthropic isn't being managed by serious people. With this policy across AWS/GH/Zed/etc, they're taking their massive lead in enterprise/govt sales and handing it to any competitor who can serve a model anywhere near these capabilities with a modestly nice UI.
Every one of the competitors capable of a similar model have been salivating for a long time at the idea of consensual data sharing. Anthropic just opened the door for everyone to do the same thing without having to deal with being the first to do so. My bet is that OpenAI etc’s next model will have these same requirements. Ever since the Mythos announcement it’s been clear that we’re heading towards a future where S…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Every one of the competitors capable of a similar model have been salivating for a long time at the idea of consensual data sharing. Anthropic just opened the door for everyone to do the same thing without having to deal with being the first to do so. My bet is that OpenAI etc’s next model will have these same requirements. Ever since the Mythos announcement it’s been clear that we’re heading towards a future where S…
This narrative any criticism about Anthropic is emotional is such corporate cope that it boggles the mind to see people defend a trillion dollar corporation time and time again all while the same corporation actively makes things worse for the average person. Cool. Everybody is doing it. Doesn’t make it right or make it good for the people. Everyone should complain and help others wake up that Anthropic isn’t the “go…
This is odd behaviour, and provides some evidence that Anthropic isn't being managed by serious people. With this policy across AWS/GH/Zed/etc, they're taking their massive lead in enterprise/govt sales and handing it to any competitor who can serve a model anywhere near these capabilities with a modestly nice UI.
They are betting that without a competitor distilling their most powerful models, they can stay ahead far enough and long enough that people will accept this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Let’s be real, chances are that the people with a lot of money on the line have given it more thought than the passing thought that you gave this comment. In theory, definitely. But this seems like a really, really, really no-good seriously bad decision from Anthropic. Like, I get why they want this (and can see it from their perspective), but many of their largest clients literally cannot allow this without regula…
I’m not sure that’s true. Do the Fed and ECB sign off on telcos keeping records of who these companies called? Of car rental companies keeping records of where employees rented cars? As long as it’s service telemetry, not used for model training, not inspected by humans, not analyzed except for service purposes… I don’t see the regulatory issue. Are there any regulations covering what telemetry your service providers…
By definition lots of the use of AI in these companies is gonna require personal data/PII etc (particularly in KYC/compliance or general processing usecases) which means that there's a regulatory constraint.
I personally would've thought that said organisations and regulators would be massively opposed to this for privacy and risk reasons, which is why I think this won't happen.
Even the companies with less sensitive data are generally paranoid about service providers getting "their" (actually their customers) data.
> Are there any regulations covering what telemetry your service providers can keep?
In the EU, this should be proportionate and should avoid special categories of personal data (which FIs will have a lot of).