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

Anthropic updates their terms to verify age or identity

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 197 posts

Re: Anthropic updates their terms to verify age or identity

#171

Post by rvnx »

panny wrote: post #156
rvnx wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From a privacy perspective, your objective is to stay away from people who have interest to snoop on your conversations. So from the perspective of your teen, they would benefit from using z.ai or ChatGPT or Claude, etc, rather than the local server where you can see all the conversations. What uncensored model do you recommend using ?

>From a privacy perspective, your objective is to stay away from people who have interest to snoop on your conversations. >So from the perspective of your teen, they would benefit from using z.ai or ChatGPT or Claude, etc, rather than the local server where you can see all the conversations. That is bonkers. If I were a parent, I would hope my child would trust me more than systems monitored by FBI/NSA/etc. Like, wha…

Private conversations of a teen have low value for FBI/NSA. They have infinite value to their parents.

The state isn't going to ground them, shame them at dinner, out them, or pull them out of a relationship, punish them.

Parents reading your browsing history and private conversations when you are 14-18 years old (the age of teenagers) is very very creepy, unless there is a specific danger to avoid. It's like if you read their private journal.

Adolescents need a private inner world to form an identity, and heavy parental intrusion ("psychological control") is the real distrust. Trust them, they are people, not possessions.

You can guide them, but do not store their private messages locally under your control using the excuse of protecting them from NSA.

If they trust you, they will tend to tell you upfront the things they have questions about, there is really no need to spy on their thoughts.

Same with husband/wife btw.

Re: Anthropic updates their terms to verify age or identity

#172

Post by ceejayoz »

micromacrofoot wrote: post #116
ceejayoz wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't the face scan intended to validate your passport, which you show, and does demonstrate age and identity?

haha wait they ask for passports too?

The Fable shutdown requires them to limit access to US citizens.

Re: Anthropic updates their terms to verify age or identity

#173

Post by thewebguyd »

scottyah wrote: post #157
thewebguyd wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah yes, I forgot, Linus Torvalds and the thousands of others that built Linux over time are all slaves. Guess someone should probably go rescue them.

None of them were compelled, and nobody is stopping you from running your own LLM generously provided by others. Doesn't mean when linux came out people nationalized Apple and Microsoft.

The risk I'm talking about isn't nationalization of companies, its corporate monopolization of frontier intelligence capabilities through capital consolidation and regulatory capture.

"Just run your own LLM" ignores the asymmetry of frontier intelligence. You can build an operating system in your garage with just time and cheap hardware. You cannot go build GPT-5. And that's the problem with keeping it proprietary. If the primary cognitive engines of human progress are consolidated within just a handful of closed, proprietary cartels that can gate, alter, and revoke capabilities at will it creates a permanent economic underclass.

The foundational infrastructure of our collective future shouldn't be entirely walled off. Fair compensation for a commercial product doesn't mean monopolization of foundational capabilities.

Re: Anthropic updates their terms to verify age or identity

#174

Post by infamouscow »

extr wrote: post #141
SimianSci wrote: post #14

More signal that the open-weight models should be our destiny as an industry. These proprietary models are being used to usher in more surveillance and gatekeeping across the industry.

They are not going to let open weights models with zero restrictions exist dude. They will be regulated like guns, or probably closer to nerve gas or enriched uranium.

The government is not going to enforce this, the game theory does not work in their favor.

The SCOTUS has made it exceptionally clear mathematics and software are protected by the First Amendment. The Atomic Energy Act of 1954 tries to make a very narrow exception for nuclear weapons, but

1. The law has never been challenged in court for being unconstitutional, and

2. It doesn't apply to model weights

Any attempt by the government to suppress open models will meet legal challenges on the grounds of (1) or (2).

Congress could amend the act to include model weights, but that won't prevent legal challenges on the grounds of it being unconstitutional (which it is).

Re: Anthropic updates their terms to verify age or identity

#175

Post by jauntywundrkind »

jrochkind1 wrote: post #81
roadside_picnic wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a home server that runs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B through llama.cpp with Open WebUI for the user facing interface. My teen isn't super interested in AI, but whenever they do feel curious they have their own account they can use on our home network. As far as chatting goes local models are more than capable for handling standard chat questions, doing research, helping troubleshoot problems etc. In fact it was an agent po…

What about local models do you find preferable? I guess "starting to find them preferable" suggests to me you think they work better, but this is surprising to me so I think I may have misunderstood, so I ask! Like you're saying they work better than the proprietary models (in what ways?), or you find them mostly good enough and prefer the privacy or cost, or what?

The local models are willing to share their thinking. The Big AI models don't share their thinking, leaving only vague summaries. Having an AI that deliberately cloaks it's reasoning, that goes out of it's way to act like a Searls Chinese Room Experiment, that deliberately conceals information is incredibly gross.

I love what I get from Opus or GPT, but mainly I use GLM and it's so starkly apparent how much better it is that it let's me work together with it, that I can nudge it as it works by correcting bad assumptions or clarifying for it, as it works. And... it just doesn't feel icky. It's not a quasi-mystical alien intelligence, which, honestly, gives me strong "this should be destroyed, is unsafe, and feels outright impermissible" vibes. As a coder, seeing thinking saves time and prevents errors. As a civilization, seeing thinking let's people understand what the AI is working with and grounds society in an appreciation for what is happening, keeps us a little moored. Personally, if I were a government, I would not allow it.

Recent submission on this, The text in Claude Code’s “Extended Thinking” output is not authentic. https://patrickmccanna.net/the-text-in-claude-codes-extended... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48630535

Re: Anthropic updates their terms to verify age or identity

#176

Post by jauntywundrkind »

CobrastanJorji wrote: post #46
SimianSci wrote: post #14

More signal that the open-weight models should be our destiny as an industry. These proprietary models are being used to usher in more surveillance and gatekeeping across the industry.

Someone should start a nonprofit company focused on developing Open AI. I bet we could even get some sensible billionaires to help the effort.

Allen Institute for Artificial Intelligence (ai2) is doing really good open source work in the west. It's awful that the west has so few other pokers in the fire here for nonprofit AI. https://allenai.org/

Re: Anthropic updates their terms to verify age or identity

#177

Post by ai-x »

card_zero wrote: post #102
chinathrow wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this satire? I really can't tell.

Bragging about a strategy isn't very strategic. So the comment's purpose is something else.

Warren Buffett brags about his strategy. Jeff Bezos brags about his strategy. The reason they can brag is, even if it's simple, competition doesn't have the culture to copy/follow it. (My post is literally downvoted)

Losing privacy has ZERO downsides for ordinary people. Nobody cares about your data. Literally, put all your life on a YouTube channel and see how many views that Video will get. ZERO.

Irrational fears (especially if it's conspiratorial) => Sub-optimal decision.

Just like Buffett, Bezos, my strategy is simple -- go against firms that are making irrational decision. It's the same framework to adopt cloud, AI and many frontier technologies and disrupt

Re: Anthropic updates their terms to verify age or identity

#178

Post by jrockway »

scottyah wrote: post #155
jrockway wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with this. Computing as a field is the way it is because there is a low barrier to entry. My dad gave me a Tandy 1000 and some programming books, and now I have a very lucrative career. I never took any classes. I never had to beg anyone for permission. I could just get started making things with the minimal investment of a cheap personal computer. (And eventually, an Internet connection. Working with other p…

Did your dad give you a Tandy 1000 or a Cray X-MP/48? Do you really think you need the most top-of-the-line model to learn anything, or will a locally run gemma4 (or whatever it turns into) still get you going just the same as when you were a child?

That's true, local models are good. The Tandy 1000 was really only good for a little bit QBASIC. Still fun!

The other is that computing in general feels more accessible? While some models are free, you still can't easily make your own model. But I see the argument where you can't really just build your own computer anymore (no one person knows how to make a modern CPU, and you can't do it at home). You are always beholden to society, nothing truly starts in your basement at home. And it didn't in the nostalgia era that I remember either.

Re: Anthropic updates their terms to verify age or identity

#179

Post by nijave »

sosodev wrote: post #104
anigbrowl wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sort of. A full trillion-parameter model needs about $300k of server hardware to run in and a lot of electricity, making it feasible only for very wealthy individuals, but quite practical for businesses and institutions above a certain size...although they in turn would typically gatekeep access. You can drastically reduce the requirements by running models at a lower bitrate, which somewhat reduces accuracy but not…

You can run a trillion parameter model with decent quality for far less than $300k. A cluster of 4 AMD AI Max 395+ boards with 128GB unified memory each can be had for around $15k. That would run the 4-bit quant of a trillion param model well enough for personal use. At full use the cluster would only be consuming around 400-500W of power too. That's about the same as one high end graphics card. That's still a lot of…

Which model? I see a suspiciously similar post on amd.com running 2 bit Kimi quant on a four node cluster over 5Gbps Ethernet

Assuming math works here although I think there's some caveats depending on the model architecture, 1T 4 bit is 465Gi just for the weights so you wouldn't be able to fit kv cache.

It's showing about 8-9 tk/sec which seems quite slow for something like a web search with result aggregate although maybe bareable for smaller context stuff

The thing I've been running into with z.ai hosted GLM-5.2 is the 2024 knowledge cutoff. Anything recent requires web augmentation which is more token intensive so low tk/sec hurts even more than a "smarter" model

It seems (somewhat unsurprisingly) open weight models have older knowledge cutoffs.

Re: Anthropic updates their terms to verify age or identity

#180

Post by sosodev »

nijave wrote: post #179
sosodev wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can run a trillion parameter model with decent quality for far less than $300k. A cluster of 4 AMD AI Max 395+ boards with 128GB unified memory each can be had for around $15k. That would run the 4-bit quant of a trillion param model well enough for personal use. At full use the cluster would only be consuming around 400-500W of power too. That's about the same as one high end graphics card. That's still a lot of…

Which model? I see a suspiciously similar post on amd.com running 2 bit Kimi quant on a four node cluster over 5Gbps Ethernet Assuming math works here although I think there's some caveats depending on the model architecture, 1T 4 bit is 465Gi just for the weights so you wouldn't be able to fit kv cache. It's showing about 8-9 tk/sec which seems quite slow for something like a web search with result aggregate althoug…

I don’t have any particular model in mind, sorry. My data is just rough estimates based on my experience with a single node setup. You might need to opt for a 2 or 3 bit model to get the full context window. The KV cache memory consumption as well overall performance will be heavily dependent on the model’s architecture. The performance too will depend a lot on the inference server chosen and its configuration. I suspect a sub-agent running a much smaller model would be the ideal way to get the latest knowledge via web search and summarization.

I’m not trying to say that this would be a great experience or really compete with just buying a subscription to the top models. Rather I just wanted to point out that $300k is an absurd estimate for a trillion param model meant for personal use.

Post reply on HN