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

AWS Bedrock to require sharing data with Anthropic for Mythos and future models

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 274 posts

Re: AWS Bedrock to require sharing data with Anthropic for Mythos and future models

#211

Post by mrhottakes »

UqWBcuFx6NV4r wrote: post #38
OtherShrezzing wrote: post #27

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.

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.

Yeah, the AI bubble has been inflated to this size because the money people are thinking carefully and rationally.

Re: AWS Bedrock to require sharing data with Anthropic for Mythos and future models

#212

Post by thefounder »

thewebguyd wrote: post #202
JeremyNT wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's all extremely dystopian and I don't see how things improve. The handful of megacorps that have access to the compute and troves of stolen IP to train their secret models on have no incentive to contribute back. They say their models are too dangerous for the public, so they can nerf the GA versions while allowing only their preferred megacorp or nation state partners access to the real secret good versions. We c…

> They don't do this stuff out of the kindness of their hearts No, but they do have incentive to continue to release with open weights because doing so directly affects the US based labs that are doing this for profit and power. What's likely to happen is import controls on software as a form of US protectionism. It will be the encryption battle all over again, but this time about your right to both run AI models loc…

You can see already a lot of PR from Anthropic on this(ban the unsafe open source) in all major newspapers(I.e WSJ,Ft etc).

Re: AWS Bedrock to require sharing data with Anthropic for Mythos and future models

#213

Post by thefounder »

nicce wrote: post #159
JeremyNT wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's all extremely dystopian and I don't see how things improve. The handful of megacorps that have access to the compute and troves of stolen IP to train their secret models on have no incentive to contribute back. They say their models are too dangerous for the public, so they can nerf the GA versions while allowing only their preferred megacorp or nation state partners access to the real secret good versions. We c…

> The handful of megacorps that have access to the compute and troves of stolen IP to train their secret models on have no incentive to contribute back. Meta and Anthropic both trained on pirated books and there were not required to destroy their models. I simply don't get it. It just encourages to do things first and see later what happens. Regulations are just a small business cost.

You got it right! Regulations are just for small guys! You don’t see agents after Anthropic’s CEO or after Sam Altman as we’ve seen on Kim Dotcom

Re: AWS Bedrock to require sharing data with Anthropic for Mythos and future models

#214

Post by thefounder »

RA_Fisher wrote: post #46
OtherShrezzing wrote: post #27

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.

Well I have just tested it and GPT 5.5 is still smarter. It catches bugs that Fable doesn’t. Anthropic Fable is basically still sloppy like Opus 4.x. And I got also the downgrade for “cyber violations” trying to build a custom Debian ISO…that tells me their safeguards are sh**. I didn’t ask it to hack anything. Just to make a script that builds a custom Debian distribution with various settings…so this Fable thing seems like a flop&slop already. That warning plus the privacy change is the wake up call to move from Anthropic

Re: AWS Bedrock to require sharing data with Anthropic for Mythos and future models

#215

Post by treis »

JeremyNT wrote: post #132
dsign wrote: post #85

The root of the problem is that AI-as-a-service is corked, because companies providing it have a hell of an incentive to use all that data to out-compete their competitors, and they can do so in secret. To say nothing of salivating law-enforcement who really, really wants to tap into it. I'm hoping there will be at some point open-source and affordable hardware that can run competent models.

It's all extremely dystopian and I don't see how things improve. The handful of megacorps that have access to the compute and troves of stolen IP to train their secret models on have no incentive to contribute back. They say their models are too dangerous for the public, so they can nerf the GA versions while allowing only their preferred megacorp or nation state partners access to the real secret good versions. We c…

I don't think this makes much sense. The best filter is money and they're not going to go through this convoluted malarkey to limit their customers.

IMHO this is about protecting their model. If you can get a N-1 model for 1% of the N cost their business breaks down.

Re: AWS Bedrock to require sharing data with Anthropic for Mythos and future models

#216

Post by tweetle_beetle »

mrhottakes wrote: post #208
ferguess_k wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The root of the problem is that ordinary people don't make enough noises for any problems they see in life, so they are essentially cattles. Do you care about cattle's opinions? I guess a few of us do, but most of us don't.

Would humans change their treatment of cattle if the cattle made louder noises? That seems doubtful.

A very large and powerful government puts an awful lot of effort into making sure people don't reference a particular time their military vehicle made contact with a person standing still decades ago.

Re: AWS Bedrock to require sharing data with Anthropic for Mythos and future models

#218

Post by EwanToo »

ValentineC wrote: post #183
calgoo wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, we are unhappy because there is no guarantee that my corporate documents wont be shared or trained on. We are already paying plus for using bedrock instead of the API version from Anthropic, so now there is no reason to use bedrock anymore. This whole thing about this model being too powerful to share is just the usual BS. Is an advanced model that dont have guardrails, just like the models that have been shared…

> We are already paying plus for using bedrock instead of the API version from Anthropic, so now there is no reason to use bedrock anymore. Doesn't Bedrock have the same API token pricing as paying Anthropic direct?

Yes, it's exactly the same price

Re: AWS Bedrock to require sharing data with Anthropic for Mythos and future models

#219

Post by Matl »

zozbot234 wrote: post #177
JeremyNT wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's all extremely dystopian and I don't see how things improve. The handful of megacorps that have access to the compute and troves of stolen IP to train their secret models on have no incentive to contribute back. They say their models are too dangerous for the public, so they can nerf the GA versions while allowing only their preferred megacorp or nation state partners access to the real secret good versions. We c…

Realistically, local/open weight models will always be limited in idiosyncratic world knowledge compared to the proprietary frontier. There's just very limited upside to releasing tens or hundreds of terabytes of open weights for something that literally can only run in very large AI data centers, and Fable/Mythos is near enough to that class. Smaller models can be smart in very real ways, but the extent to which tho…

I think the best bet is that that at some point going from 30B params to 9T params is realistically going to give the closed model a 10% edge in niche tasks, but that the open model would be very useful most of the time still.

I don't know how realistic that expectation is, but if you think about the difference between say 10,000 USD speakers and 50,000 speakers then the 50k ones may sound slightly better but certainly not enough to justify the 40k difference

Re: AWS Bedrock to require sharing data with Anthropic for Mythos and future models

#220

Post by plasma_beam »

mrhottakes wrote: post #210
miki123211 wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This makes these models unusable in the settings where people are actually benefiting from these models being on Bedrock (e.g. they have customer contracts that limit who they can share data with, etc). Does it, though? Does Amazon have a clause in their contracts that forbids data sharing with any and all third parties? Is all AWS support and datacenter personnel employed directly by Amazon? Do they seriously have…

For data on GovCloud and similar deployments, data sharing is indeed restricted and access by AWS support folks is heavily controlled.

Presumably Fable 5 won't be made available on GovCloud Bedrock, right now it's not [1].

However what I'm not seeing discussed anywhere are government agencies that are on commercial AWS, have ATOs in place to use Bedrock, and are now being surprised with this new sharing of data with Anthropic and will have to scramble to disable(?) or institute policies banning Fable 5 usage in Bedrock. Throw in there all your sensitive industries, healthcare, insurance, etc.

[1] https://docs.aws.amazon.com/govcloud-us/latest/UserGuide/gov...

Edit: Fable 5 is not FedRAMPed, but it's not clear to me whether or not AWS permits access to it via GovCloud's model request process.

Post reply on HN