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

Higher usage limits for Claude and a compute deal with SpaceX

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 519 posts

Re: Higher usage limits for Claude and a compute deal with SpaceX

#211

Post by mcmcmc »

dzhiurgis wrote: post #201
Sammi wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone who has googled just once to ask if datacenters in space make any sense, has found out they don't because they can't get rid of heat. That leaves only two kinds of people left who are still talking excitedly about datacenters in space: The uninformed and the grifters.

Scott Manley, I’d say one of the top pop space youtubers say otherwise. If anything it’s easier in space. On earth most complexity in datacenter is cooling. In space you just radiate it away. And SpaceX already proven they can launch sort of datacenters 10k times by launching Starlink (up to 20KW of solar each IIRC). FWIW Musk should support Bernie Sanders more. Putting moratoriums on datacenters would make space bas…

“YouTuber” is an extremely poor qualification for a supposedly trusted source

Re: Higher usage limits for Claude and a compute deal with SpaceX

#212

Post by impulser_ »

23rf wrote: post #146
Sevii wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anthropic needs any compute they can get. So if Elon wants to build orbital data centers Anthropic would be happy to run models on it. There isn't really any doubt Elon can build orbital data centers the question is if they are economical compared to earth based.

I love how this line of thinking completely avoids the issue re. improvements in local models. I suppose if you are desperate to justify a large investment this what you would do - frame the story in a particular way.

Local models are always going to be useless unless compute get significantly cheaper, and it's not. TSMC might literally run out of capacity to build any consumer compute product.

Once computer constraints ease up, you will see much larger models. The reason LLM seems to have stalled a bit is because there just not enough compute.

You have more people using AI which requires more compute, and you want to build larger models which requires more compute and you have limited compute. What do you do?

Re: Higher usage limits for Claude and a compute deal with SpaceX

#213

Post by losvedir »

> 300 megawatts of new capacity (over 220,000 NVIDIA GPUs)

The scale is just mindboggling here. Are there any blog posts or anything discussing what kind of infrastructure is used for even just the inference side (nevermind the training) for SotA models like Opus? I would have thought it might be secret, but given that you can actually run the models yourself on AWS Bedrock doesn't that give an indication?

Re: Higher usage limits for Claude and a compute deal with SpaceX

#214

Post by causal »

polski-g wrote: post #178
causal wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I was just Googling this, and apparently most datacenters don't pay any state tax on revenue generated by said datacenter? Huge loophole if true, no wonder capital investment in datacenters is so high. [0] [0] https://www.datacenterknowledge.com/regulations/how-are-data...

I like how you said "googling this", but then didn't actually read the article you linked.

> In general, data centers only pay corporate income tax if they generate revenue. Not all data centers do this because many don’t sell goods or services; they simply house servers. By qualifying as business expenses rather than revenue generators, they reduce the tax liability of their parent companies.

> Thus, when it comes to income tax, at least, many data centers – especially hyperscale data centers owned by large companies – don’t generate tax revenue because they don’t generate direct operating income.

Re: Higher usage limits for Claude and a compute deal with SpaceX

#215

Post by jizzywizzy »

nickthegreek wrote: post #92
mirzap wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me it's the opposite. I almost never hit hourly limit, but I hit weekly limit in about 5 days.

Would be more meaningful if everyone said what plan they are on, as there are 3 different ones that users could be discussing.

Along with how many 5-hour windows they use in a day.

If you're using it 24/7 then yes, I'm sure the weekly limit is more of a concern.

If you're just using it during working hours - ie. you only use two 5-hour windows per day - then you probably, like me, struggle to hit the weekly limit even if you do max out some 5-hour windows.

Re: Higher usage limits for Claude and a compute deal with SpaceX

#216

Post by georgemcbay »

dboreham wrote: post #116
arian_ wrote: post #14

Anthropic renting out the data center Elon built for Grok is the kind of plot twist you can't make up.

I'm just relieved to read that it isn't in fact...in space.

I'd rather it be in space than where it is now, poisoning people in the rural parts of Memphis with off-gassing from their methane turbines.

Re: Higher usage limits for Claude and a compute deal with SpaceX

#217

Post by dwaltrip »

mirzap wrote: post #49

Doubling the five-hour rate limits is merely a marketing stunt if the weekly rates are not also doubled. It simply means that you can reach the weekly limits in three days instead of five.

I don’t think I’ve hit either limit a single time in the past 5 months after upgrading to the $100 plan.

On heavy weeks I probably am using it consistently for at least 6+ hours a day.

Although, I’m pretty rigorous about always keeping my sessions under 200-250k tokens.

Re: Higher usage limits for Claude and a compute deal with SpaceX

#218

Post by thrownthatway »

morgoths_bane wrote: post #79
thrownthatway wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Honestly if he was a Nazi that would be less worse than whatever the fuck he is.

Did you also dance in the street when Charlie got shot in the neck?

Re: Higher usage limits for Claude and a compute deal with SpaceX

#219

Post by zeafoamrun »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #86
JMKH42 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think space compute is going to work out, but I would certainly say "yes happy to buy space compute from you in the future if you offer it at a good price" If it happens it happens, if not, it doesn't.

It makes no sense. We're being presented with a forced choice -- put them in space, or put them in the middle of downtown Seattle. This is stupid. I don't understand what's happening... specifically, what mental virus is spreading that lowers everybody's IQ by 10-20 points, evidently including my own. Put the data centers in the ocean, powered by solar and networked with Starlink or LEO. Put them in the desert. Put t…

The middle of downtown Seattle would be greatly improved if it were replaced by a giant data center.

Re: Higher usage limits for Claude and a compute deal with SpaceX

#220

Post by thrownthatway »

formvoltron wrote: post #117
thrownthatway wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Maybe because nature put them in the ground for a reason? Minor risk that taking what took 200 million years to put into the ground out in a few hundred years?

Do you believe in God?
Post reply on HN