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

Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

751–760 of 1001 posts

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#751

Post by binary0010 »

mrngld wrote: post #711
echelon wrote: post #685

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anthropic raped everyone without asking and stole their labor to build their career-commoditizing tech. Distillation is Robin Hooding it back so that one trillion dollar company doesn't reap all the benefits of their automation of the workforce. Distillation is Prometheus bringing fire from the gods to give to ordinary humans. Something we all own anyway, but that was kept from us. Distillation is freedom. Everyone s…

Eaaaaasy now, the Chinese labs aren't freedom fighters on behalf the common man. They're not non-profits, they're not neutral transnational organizations only dedicated to open source efforts. They're Chinese companies offering open source models now as loss leaders to keep themselves in the game because they know virtually nobody, especially in the corporate world, would contract with them and give them access to th…

I think most of us know why they're doing it. We are just very pleased with it regardless.

1. I get great products for nearly free 2. Anthropic/openai/etc will hopefully be destroyed since they stole everyone's work and are trying to capitalize on pure theft.

Win-win. The why of it is not really that relevant.

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#752

Post by HarHarVeryFunny »

SubiculumCode wrote: post #520
0xbadcafebee wrote: post #11

There's two basic kinds of distillation: 1) the massive [and dumb] method where you ask a question and use the answer as reinforcement (Black Box), and 2) more targeted distillation where you use one model to directly inform/train/guide another model (RLAIF). The latter is basically fine-tuning the model with direction from another model. Thousands of businesses do this every day to fine-tune. This is almost certainl…

The compute deficit of Chinese Ai companies is real, and it IS THE ONLY competitive advantage that Western companies have. The only way the U.S. keeps that edge is to prevent distillation. The only way Chinese companies can make up for the deficit in compute is to distill. There innovation in great supply on every side of the Ocean. Its about the chips. And in terms of national security, for the U.S., and for China,…

If compute or access to training data were the only issues, then companies like Meta and X.ai (Grok) should be doing better, even Google for that matter. Musk even admitted that Grok used training data from OpenAI models.

https://techcrunch.com/2026/04/30/elon-musk-testifies-that-x...

While there is no moat as such, there is still a lot of expertise that goes into training SOTA models. There's a reason Google was willing to pay $2.7B just to get Noam Shazeer back to improve Gemini.

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#753

Post by civet_java »

whateverboat wrote: post #374
petterroea wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China aren't offering a cheaper solution. They are subsidizing an existing one (which is already subsidized) in order to gain foothold. The difference is that in the US subsidies come from VC, while OP implies subsidies come from the AI labs that buy the training data (which may as well also be VC backed, so just one extra hop). This isn't "the market working as intended", this is an exhaustion fight to the bottom wh…

I mean, for what it's worth, we have subsidized Anthropic by allowing them to train on copyrighted stuff. (I know it is still legal, and I support the legality, but the economics are what they are with people's content paying a big one time subsidized cost (to the level of at least 500B). So, the least Anthropic can do is pay it forward.

I am mostly economics illiterate but I understand a subsidy to be an economic concession given by the state to an entity which gives said entity a relative advantage compared to its peers.

In that sense (which could very well be bogus), letting a company violate individual IP of basically every human is less of an economic concession and more of unconsented to IP open season.

Even if one were to drop "economic" from "economic concession" and instead view a subsidy through the lens of a more general concession, one could say that the US Govt gave US AI companies a legal concession to sidestep the copyright protections of other US entities. But the US Govt should only get to undermine the copyright protection of other US entities - who gave American companies the right to violate the copyright of non-Americans?

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#755

Post by dev1ycan »

It's so funny how LLMs, which trained on millions of books, stolen (and even if they weren't, which they were, pirated from online pirate sites like libg and annas, they didn't have consent for the VAST majority of them), and stolen code, and stolen comments, etc.

Now complain about their stuff getting "stolen"... lol.

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#756

Post by ipaddr »

crispyambulance wrote: post #739
anon373839 wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> These complaints of distillation are inflating the problem to make it sound worse than it is Unfortunately, the Reuters piece itself is complicit in this dramatization. The lede paragraph parrots Anthropic's talking point that distillation is an "attack", without using quotes that would alert the reader that this framing is a corporate talking point. Distillation is NOT an attack.

The standard of neutrality that people here pretend to require from news organizations is not even remotely realistic. It was a timely story from Reuters. They do fast news feeds, like APnews. Could it have been better or more accurate? Sure, they could have gone into why distillation may or may not be seen as "an attack". But then it would have been a more involved story, defeating the purpose of a news feed. The Re…

Good enough slop to serve the masses. Doesn't need to be truthful because its fast? Why even both to write anything?

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#757

Post by buellerbueller »

ALLTaken wrote: post #750
0xbadcafebee wrote: post #11

There's two basic kinds of distillation: 1) the massive [and dumb] method where you ask a question and use the answer as reinforcement (Black Box), and 2) more targeted distillation where you use one model to directly inform/train/guide another model (RLAIF). The latter is basically fine-tuning the model with direction from another model. Thousands of businesses do this every day to fine-tune. This is almost certainl…

They want to create a monopoly and destroy every competitor, before they got a chance to rival them. Why can't OSS software rival closed source software? It should be an open market, at least "somewhat", what's happening for real? EU providers will also get banned, if they reach or exceed US model capabilties? Closed source providers can close your account at a whim like and destroy your business and then use the dat…

>They want to create a monopoly and destroy every competitor, before they got a chance to rival them.

VC/Startup playbook 101.

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#758

Post by deaton »

ALLTaken wrote: post #750
0xbadcafebee wrote: post #11

There's two basic kinds of distillation: 1) the massive [and dumb] method where you ask a question and use the answer as reinforcement (Black Box), and 2) more targeted distillation where you use one model to directly inform/train/guide another model (RLAIF). The latter is basically fine-tuning the model with direction from another model. Thousands of businesses do this every day to fine-tune. This is almost certainl…

They want to create a monopoly and destroy every competitor, before they got a chance to rival them. Why can't OSS software rival closed source software? It should be an open market, at least "somewhat", what's happening for real? EU providers will also get banned, if they reach or exceed US model capabilties? Closed source providers can close your account at a whim like and destroy your business and then use the dat…

Well Zai's GLM 5.2 legitimately is a frontier-level model, though not quite parallel with Opus or Fable. Unfortunately, its too damn big to run locally for most people. Thats the bottleneck right now; the open-weight models exist but something capable of competing with the frontier models just can't run on anything normal yet.

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#760

Post by onetrickwolf »

“Distillation attack” are we joking here.

If anything these models should be compelled to be public since they have been trained off public data. What an absurd overreach to call this an attack.

It’s clear they are scapegoating national security and China at this point to build an anti-competitive moat.

I generally really like Anthropic’s work and models but stuff like this scares me for the future. We are positioning these companies to have too much power. The public’s life is getting worse while these companies consolidate power using data they stole from the public.

Post reply on HN