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

Alibaba to ban Claude Code in workplace over alleged backdoor risks, source says

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 299 posts

Re: Alibaba to ban Claude Code in workplace over alleged backdoor risks, source says

#61

Post by messe »

breppp wrote: post #57
vrganj wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anthropic stole the entire internet. Excuse my language, but they can fuck right off.

The issue here is not whether Anthropic used Common Crawl, Alibaba also does that. The issue is that by distilling Claude, Alibaba reuses the IP anthropic used to train the model that's more akin to historical Chinese reverse engineering methods and disrespect of IP

> Alibaba reuses the IP anthropic used to train the model that's more akin to historical Chinese reverse engineering methods and disrespect of IP

Why is this any worse than Anthropic's disrepect of IP? You've apparently drawn a distinction between the two here, but I'm failing to see what it actually is.

Re: Alibaba to ban Claude Code in workplace over alleged backdoor risks, source says

#62

Post by breppp »

vrganj wrote: post #59
breppp wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue here is not whether Anthropic used Common Crawl, Alibaba also does that. The issue is that by distilling Claude, Alibaba reuses the IP anthropic used to train the model that's more akin to historical Chinese reverse engineering methods and disrespect of IP

Anthropic clearly doesn't respect other people's IP, it's real rich that they now insist on theirs being worthy of protection. Fwiw, I think the concept of IP in general is counter to human progress.

It's more complicated than that because Google has been legally displaying other people copyrighted material for years.

In any case there's still a difference between publicly available copyrighted data and whether you can use it for model training, and the innovation around model training, RLHF, etc which you presumably have some interest as a country to allow companies to invest in with some legal protections (like the diff between patent law vs copyright law)

Re: Alibaba to ban Claude Code in workplace over alleged backdoor risks, source says

#63

Post by rlpb »

short_sells_poo wrote: post #60
p0w3n3d wrote: post #31

[flagged]

The corollary is that there are no morals once the stakes are in the $ billions, let alone hundreds of billions. This isn't even about a single person or personality. Very few people in such position could stand fast by their moral code. In any case, an environment that favors profit above everything will naturally select for individuals who are unencumbered by such hindrances. There might've been 100s of Altmans and…

Copyright law is an artificial legal construct, not a moral code.

I think appropriate attribution is a moral code, but I am not able to attribute every idea I have to all those who helped me develop the general intelligence that I use to develop such ideas.

Re: Alibaba to ban Claude Code in workplace over alleged backdoor risks, source says

#64

Post by ravenstine »

Employers in 2022:

> No! Don't install that lodash thing without explicit approval from IT. Oh, you want a license for Charles Proxy? Gee, I dunno... we've got a budget to maintain.

Employers in 2023:

> No! You can't use ChatGPT at work – it's a security risk.

Employers in 2024:

> Okay, you can use Github Copilot I guess, but you'll have to endure boring corporate training on what you're allowed to do with it.

Employers with dollar signs in their eyes in 2025:

> We attended a seminar about vibe coding. Why aren't you dumbasses keeping up with the times? Use Claude Code for everything! Don't write any of your own code anymore. We don't even really care if you use yolo mode. Just review code and push 10x more features! Use unlimited tokens! Money printer go brrrrr.

Employers in 2026:

> You mean giving one or two companies full autonomous access to our workstations while stupifying our engineers wasn't a sound business plan?

Re: Alibaba to ban Claude Code in workplace over alleged backdoor risks, source says

#65

Post by kataklasm »

vrganj wrote: post #59
breppp wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue here is not whether Anthropic used Common Crawl, Alibaba also does that. The issue is that by distilling Claude, Alibaba reuses the IP anthropic used to train the model that's more akin to historical Chinese reverse engineering methods and disrespect of IP

Anthropic clearly doesn't respect other people's IP, it's real rich that they now insist on theirs being worthy of protection. Fwiw, I think the concept of IP in general is counter to human progress.

The practical implementation of IP? Sure, that's debatable. But the concept of IP is rooted in favoring progress. The thought process being, that if one's intellectual work can be copied and reused and modified and what not without issues, why should anyone invent things anymore? Just wait for the next person to do it and then copy their work, that's way less effort than inventing things yourself. IP aims to protect progress by making sure inventors have actual incentive to invent stuff. They way it's implemented is fundamentalst flawed, I agree, but the concept itself? I'm not so clear on that

Re: Alibaba to ban Claude Code in workplace over alleged backdoor risks, source says

#66

Post by yurish »

soraminazuki wrote: post #52
johnathan101 wrote: post #18

[flagged]

It's insane that it's becoming a concern now. It should've ended the discussion from the very beginning.

Enterprises host their entire infrastructure on US-base clouds. And for many, it still is not a problem.

Re: Alibaba to ban Claude Code in workplace over alleged backdoor risks, source says

#67

Post by jitl »

rvnx wrote: post #19
dgellow wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not what a backdoor is…

When a company can remotely push code without explicit user approval, and code that was hostile / almost malicious, it is a backdoor

so like… any website

Re: Alibaba to ban Claude Code in workplace over alleged backdoor risks, source says

#68

Post by dan_i »

ravenstine wrote: post #64

Employers in 2022: > No! Don't install that lodash thing without explicit approval from IT. Oh, you want a license for Charles Proxy? Gee, I dunno... we've got a budget to maintain. Employers in 2023: > No! You can't use ChatGPT at work – it's a security risk. Employers in 2024: > Okay, you can use Github Copilot I guess, but you'll have to endure boring corporate training on what you're allowed to do with it. Employ…

2025 taught me that my employer would replace me with a slave if they could get away with it.

The confusing part to me is why these companies believed the "AGI" hype, I.E. that OpenAI or Claude's LLM is the ideal white collar slave.

I suppose I can understand that the executive class resents labor enough to make irrational business decisions for the purpose of insulting the workers who design and operate their companies.

That being said, the 2025 AI binge feels like a murder-suicide done by the executives of many of these companies.

Re: Alibaba to ban Claude Code in workplace over alleged backdoor risks, source says

#69

Post by pjmlp »

feverzsj wrote: post #17

Considering their massive distillation, if US companies stop publishing new models to the public, would China still be able to develop new open weight models?

Of course, it is like any other kind of weapon system, eventually the knowledge gets acquired.

Re: Alibaba to ban Claude Code in workplace over alleged backdoor risks, source says

#70

Post by matheusmoreira »

breppp wrote: post #57
vrganj wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anthropic stole the entire internet. Excuse my language, but they can fuck right off.

The issue here is not whether Anthropic used Common Crawl, Alibaba also does that. The issue is that by distilling Claude, Alibaba reuses the IP anthropic used to train the model that's more akin to historical Chinese reverse engineering methods and disrespect of IP

> reuses the IP anthropic used to train the model

> disrespect of IP

Nobody other than Anthropic cares.

Post reply on HN