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

261–270 of 274 posts

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

#261

Post by Qhemlomo »

fp64 wrote: post #185
Qhemlomo wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah thats not the point though. We 'trust' Amazon already and Amazon has no incentive at all to collect the data to finetune claude because they don't own claude.

Amazon owns a large stake in Anthropic if I'm not mistaken?

Yes true but they are still two legal entities.

My company has no problems doing business with Amazon but doesn't buy from Anthropic directly.

It also has no risk that the data goes into the wrong hands if a competitor would buy Anthropic or if Anthropic becomes worthless and someone else buys the data.

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

#262

Post by dpkirchner »

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.

Maybe -- I think that's the reasoning behind government-enforced bans on photography and recording inside of slaughterhouses.

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

#263

Post by pbgcp2026 »

aveao wrote: post #173
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.

It's worthwhile to remember that this is only true of Mythos/Fable and other future models of "similar or higher capability levels" (ant is treating this as a new tier of model above Opus). Anyone who's already been happy using Haiku/Sonnet/Opus on Bedrock will not be affected by this at all.

+1 to other commenters here. * They forced Bedrock for instance to change the existing settings for ZDR / ZOA. It used to be enough to have a default. Now we must set to 'none' and pray it does what it says. * And then there is that BS about "contact your account manager, we will decide account/model retention and sharing individually" Just this creates so much uncertainty that Bedrock has become "glowing in the dark". * We have already moved everything to Gemini on Vertex.

PS: this is what you should see as an error from Bedrock. Anything else is not enough today: "AWS Bedrock Error: An error occurred (ValidationException) when calling the ConverseStream operation: The model returned the following errors: data retention mode 'none' is not available for this model"

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

#264

Post by brookst »

pixl97 wrote: post #189
brookst wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Price is based on perceived value, not cost to produce. There is no international court of price justifications; if customers are willing to pay $X you can charge $X.

That and a model can be the same size, yet use a lot more compute, I guess think of it as intelligence per watt used or something like that.

Exactly. The company should care because it drives margins. But pricing to customers should not change unless it was artificially high (competitors offer more value for same money) due to profitability concerns.

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

#265

Post by nijave »

iririririr wrote: post #245
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…

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.

SOC 2 and ISO27001 are definitely not accounting audits. Our auditors request policies, procedures, and evidence that we're following the policies and procedures. Oftentimes evidence is screenshots of the running environment (vomit) or audit logs. The auditor may or may not selectively request more information on demand (so you can't go in being sure you know what they're looking at)

If this is something you care about (compliance) your vendor due diligence process should include ensuring the company used a respected/trusted auditor.

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

#266

Post by eigencoder »

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.

Every retailer does that

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

#267

Post by dd8601fn »

calgoo wrote: post #127
cobolcomesback wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every one of the competitors capable of a similar model have been salivating for a long time at the idea of consensual data sharing. Anthropic just opened the door for everyone to do the same thing without having to deal with being the first to do so. My bet is that OpenAI etc’s next model will have these same requirements. Ever since the Mythos announcement it’s been clear that we’re heading towards a future where S…

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…

Isn’t the answer here to prohibit the use of Fable, org wide?

I suppose it’s a reckoning for corporate bullshit about security and compliance.

Have the fancy new, right now, or avoid funneling all your data to third parties. Your choice.

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

#268

Post by mwarren »

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…

Zero Data Retention does not mean zero information retention. First, this whole discussion regards AWS Bedrock's straightforward policy for users of OpenAI GPT-5.4 and GPT-5.5 models and Anthropic Claude Fable 5 saying "[inputs and outputs will be retained for up to 30 days](https://docs.aws.amazon.com/bedrock/latest/userguide/abuse-d... )." That's plenty of time for a model training run using those inputs/outputs and, once the information is encoded into model weights, the original training data can be deleted to meet the ZDR contract. For models without the 30-day retention clause, it's still possible for AWS to route inputs and outputs through a dynamic training system to encode the information into model tensors and then toss out the original "data".

Edit: linkify

Post reply on HN