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

241–250 of 274 posts

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

#241

Post by torginus »

HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #144
RA_Fisher wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think there are other models near Fable’s capabilities.

That remains to be seen. It's notable that Anthropic are still using SWEBench as a coding benchmark rather than the newer more difficult DeepSWE which shows them well behind GPT 5.5 https://deepswe.datacurve.ai/ Bear in mind that all the marketing efforts such as solving Erdos problem are the result of concerted RL training to impart those narrow capabilities, and how much of any benchmark results, or "early access"…

Remember the Death Star tweet? I reserve the right to believe upper management is somewhat out of touch.

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

#242

Post by monomial »

pixl97 wrote: post #186
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…

>This whole thing about this model being too powerful to share is just the usual BS. Then stop using AI. >But I want it all and I want it now. Spend a trillion dollars and make your own model. >No fair! Then petition your government to enact laws around this. Unfortunately the US government rules are currently "Yes, we want AI to take over the world with terminators, just as long as they share data with us".

> Then petition your government to enact laws around this.

Do you really expect your government to do anything useful here?

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

#243

Post by gwerbin »

xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #175
chatmasta wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anthropic has all the answers for that. You’ll go through some compliance exercises and classify them as a subprocessor of highest tier of data sensitivity.

There are a significant number of extremely large companies that are wholly interested in such a sub-processor. The tier of data sensitivity is irrelevant. Almost all companies are content to engage with data sub-processors with respect to customer data or some form of PII. But there are many that will absolutely not let their IP visit or reside on systems they do not control. This is absolutely a deal breaker for a…

Is it possible that Anthropic is fully aware of this, and will either negotiate special contracts with these clients on a case by case basis, or has determined that they don't make enough money by supporting them that they should care about alienating them? I'm sure there will be Oracle and SAP AI and IBM products for those specific customers, if there aren't already. Perhaps Anthropic simply doesn't need them.

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

#244

Post by dragonwriter »

miki123211 wrote: post #205
Eridrus wrote: post #191

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). If the lift from these models is high enough and no alternative springs up, people will find a way to get to yes, but if OpenAI is willing to ship a Fable-class model on Bedrock without this, all the traffic will just…

> 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…

> Does Amazon have a clause in their contracts that forbids data sharing with any and all third parties?

Well, for the services (including Bedrock, but presumably now excluding those particular Anthropic models) that they offer a HIPAA BAA covering, pretty much, if you enter a BAA with them.

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

#245

Post by iririririr »

nijave wrote: post #223
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.

>and they can do so in secret Is that really true? Zero Data Retention (ZDR) is standard language in enterprise contracts and it seems quite egregious a vendor would want to take on that amount of liability and ignore the contract terms. On top of that, Anthropic is SOC2 and ISO27001 so they've had _some_ independent auditing (although they could still try to hide such logging/recording anyway) With that in mind, the…

what an accountant audit help in this case? because that's literary all that's required for those.

I'm 100% certain they keep that for retraining. I've seen advertising pipelines promise the same thing and drown in data "because it's anonimized".

I'm certain same exact thing happens with Ai chatbots, even on top enterprise licenses.

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

#246

Post by tgmatt »

The whole point of my company using Bedrock is so that we knew our data wasn't being shipped off anywhere. This means we will a) block Mythos-class models at the organisation level and b) further consider using smaller, self-hosted models for our purposes. Nice footgun Anthropic.

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

#247

Post by tyingq »

tokioyoyo wrote: post #209
tyingq wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It will absolutely cause some non-trivial number of customers to shift their configs away from Anthropic.

You’re underestimating how much companies are willing to bend over backwards if they can “get ahead with a god model” compared to their competitors.

No, I'm not. Yes, those companies exist. And, so do many companies on the other end. Where they bend over backwards to ensure their data only lands in places where they have the exact contractual language they want. Any stodgy F500 typically falls in that category. They would not likely be using Anthropic through the AWS "bridge" in the first place if they were chasing latest/greatest.

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

#248

Post by Atotalnoob »

sidewndr46 wrote: post #237
nijave wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>and they can do so in secret Is that really true? Zero Data Retention (ZDR) is standard language in enterprise contracts and it seems quite egregious a vendor would want to take on that amount of liability and ignore the contract terms. On top of that, Anthropic is SOC2 and ISO27001 so they've had _some_ independent auditing (although they could still try to hide such logging/recording anyway) With that in mind, the…

Remember that time that Amazon swore they weren't using data to outcompete people on their platform? Then they did that.

That was Amazon retail, which made no such promise.

AWS makes ZDR promises

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

#249

Post by pbgcp2026 »

nijave wrote: post #223
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.

>and they can do so in secret Is that really true? Zero Data Retention (ZDR) is standard language in enterprise contracts and it seems quite egregious a vendor would want to take on that amount of liability and ignore the contract terms. On top of that, Anthropic is SOC2 and ISO27001 so they've had _some_ independent auditing (although they could still try to hide such logging/recording anyway) With that in mind, the…

[dead]

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

#250

Post by nullbio »

thewebguyd wrote: post #204
nullbio wrote: post #201

Cancel your subscriptions, or you are to blame. Simple. If you aren't voting with your wallet, you can't cry when the world ends.

Sure, but that's the recycling argument all over again, putting the onus on individuals when the real problem are the ultra wealthy, and in this case, the large corporations mandating AI usage and buying from the frontier labs. Me, or even me + a ton of other individual devs cancelling their personal $100/month Claude plans are a drop in the bucket of the billions of dollars of enterprise revenue they bring in. To en…

Companies are owned by individuals, and individuals make decisions for large groups of individuals. So while you and I cancelling our subs on our own isn't going to change the world, if the right people boycott Anthropic, it will make a big impact.
Post reply on HN