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

Identity verification on Claude

support.claude.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 765 posts

Re: Identity verification on Claude

#191

Post by QuiEgo »

adrian_b wrote: post #181
baq wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Serving barely useful GLM 5.2 costs what? $15k? Actually useful is like $50k? You’ll never recoup the cost unless you ‘locally’ means ‘inference provider is not the model provider’?

The high costs are necessary for high speed. When a low speed of the order of one token per second is accepted, any open weights LLM can be run on an ordinary PC (with the weights read from SSDs) and the cost becomes negligible. Such a low speed would be annoying for a chat, but I do not believe that it is "barely useful" for a coding assistant. There are plenty of tasks for which it is fine to get results some hours…

I don't know. Even the frontier models do dumb things sometimes. Being able to iterate (and iterate quickly) is really important. If you get 1 try a day, you're probably back to it being better to just code by hand. Also, you're going to get absolutely outpaced by anyone who uses AI that goes faster.

So maybe for a hobby project this is fine, but for something you have to take to market and compete with... I think it'd be a really rough sell.

EDIT: also, just to be clear: if there was a practical path to using local AI, I'd take it in a heartbeat. I hope it gets to the point that it's better to use local than paying someone $200/mo. But right now, that $200/mo is the clear best option. I get making compromises for ideology but the compromises are too big for me right now.

Re: Identity verification on Claude

#192

Post by ianm218 »

transcriptase wrote: post #182
jsyang00 wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Pointless CYA They are literally being forced to do this by the government. The counter-ask if for them to self immolate in order to take a principled stand, as access to all their models is banned.

Perhaps they should stop being holier than thou wackjobs and try the “shut the fuck up and act like a business” strategy of being a business. Seems to be working for every other AI company.

If you think the field you are working in is more dangerous and important to the future of national security than i.e. nuclear energy and nuclear bombs you should really not just shut up and act like a cold blooded capitalist.

It feels like people here are not able to separate their personal dislike of the effective altruist types from a real debate on how big the stakes of AI are.

Re: Identity verification on Claude

#194

Post by rescbr »

HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #97
rescbr wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> making it illegal to make open weights (maybe for selected models) available for download. So giving another win to China?

Are you assuming that China is/will allow it's own citizens unfettered access to AI ?!

Currently they are the ones who are publishing stuff in the open. The American discourse is to close this market.

I'm not Chinese or American. If China exports their AI technology and the US doesn't, I know who's going to be my supplier and I'd be very happy to pay them.

If they block access to their own citizens, to be frank, I could care less.

If their Party has their own version for what happened in the Tiananmen Square, so be it. They want to do business while the US is being hostile to everybody else.

Re: Identity verification on Claude

#195

Post by AnotherGoodName »

From that thread.

>The OP post is misinformation. The policy page has been unchanged since April 16 (including the words Updated this week) and has to do with verifying if you're an adult if they suspect the account is used by an under 18, which we all already know Anthropic is doing.

https://web.archive.org/web/20260416010409/https://support.c...

So this isn't new right?

Re: Identity verification on Claude

#196

Post by actionfromafar »

transcriptase wrote: post #182
jsyang00 wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Pointless CYA They are literally being forced to do this by the government. The counter-ask if for them to self immolate in order to take a principled stand, as access to all their models is banned.

Perhaps they should stop being holier than thou wackjobs and try the “shut the fuck up and act like a business” strategy of being a business. Seems to be working for every other AI company.

Just pay the bribes already.

Re: Identity verification on Claude

#197

Post by pyeri »

data-ottawa wrote: post #154

The US is really shooting itself in the foot here. The restrictions on LLM models like Fable has created a viable international LLM market where it was difficult to justify investment two weeks ago. As a non-US citizen Opus 4.8 is the best American LLM I will ever have access to. That's no longer up for debate or question. Each month that I pay Anthropic is now a depreciating value -- I'm paying for models I'll never…

Have you tried one of the Kimi K2 models or the latest GLM models by z.ai? The general consensus is that they're at least at par with Claude's class.

Re: Identity verification on Claude

#200

Post by gravity2060 »

One of my frustrations with this is for those of us who allow our under-18 year old children access to our account. If we want our kids to code with ai-assist, my read of the “ban-if-under-18” means I risk my indispensable pro account by giving my kids claude code on their laptops now. Is this a correct reading?
Post reply on HN