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

Claude Platform on AWS

claude.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 99 posts

Re: Claude Platform on AWS

#81

Post by pacoWebConsult »

ldoughty wrote: post #4

> The Claude Platform on AWS is a first of its kind offering for Anthropic, giving you all native Claude API features from day one. Anthropic operates the service and data is processed outside the AWS boundary. So it's not... On AWS... ? This statement sounds.... Backwards? I get they have another option that is in AWS, but this continues the cryptic naming problem AWS already is overloaded with

Yeah, as someone with strict export compliance concerns which forces us to use Bedrock because its exclusively us-based inference in our AWS account, this does nothing for me. Frankly, nothing Anthropic has shipped over the past 6 months besides the models themselves has been useful to our company, despite running into the same problems they're trying to solve with all of those features (managed, remote agents). There's not really a good solution, as AgentCore runtime sucks and is expensive. You basically have to build this yourself because nobody is solving for self-hosted managed infra for agents, and we don't really have the time to build this sort of system on top of building our actual product. It's very frustrating for them to put this out as a win, when it doesn't help the people who are using AWS Bedrock to begin with.

Re: Claude Platform on AWS

#82

Post by radial_symmetry »

pacoWebConsult wrote: post #81
ldoughty wrote: post #4

> The Claude Platform on AWS is a first of its kind offering for Anthropic, giving you all native Claude API features from day one. Anthropic operates the service and data is processed outside the AWS boundary. So it's not... On AWS... ? This statement sounds.... Backwards? I get they have another option that is in AWS, but this continues the cryptic naming problem AWS already is overloaded with

Yeah, as someone with strict export compliance concerns which forces us to use Bedrock because its exclusively us-based inference in our AWS account, this does nothing for me. Frankly, nothing Anthropic has shipped over the past 6 months besides the models themselves has been useful to our company, despite running into the same problems they're trying to solve with all of those features (managed, remote agents). Ther…

Synthetiq offers self-hosted (local or in your cloud)

Re: Claude Platform on AWS

#83

Post by adolph »

thedougd wrote: post #74
stingraycharles wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think the idea is that you can launder your team or product AI spend through your AWS account. This is exactly it. For any reasonably sized org, setting up new contracts with new vendors involves a lot of procurement, lawyers, negotiations, etc. If a team can just click a button in AWS, there’s no issue. This is a product / solution that solves an organizational problem, not a technical one. I wouldn’t even call…

Sadly it’s going to be more nuanced. The Bedrock models, at least, have additional click through EULAs for Anthropic models. You’re going to need to review and agree to those as well. Claude is going to be marketplace spend and that’s usually capped towards your PPA at 25%.

> click through EULAs

Every year "don't agree to things on behalf of the company"

Every day "click here to agree that ..."

Re: Claude Platform on AWS

#84

Post by xxpor »

adolph wrote: post #83
thedougd wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly it’s going to be more nuanced. The Bedrock models, at least, have additional click through EULAs for Anthropic models. You’re going to need to review and agree to those as well. Claude is going to be marketplace spend and that’s usually capped towards your PPA at 25%.

> click through EULAs Every year "don't agree to things on behalf of the company" Every day "click here to agree that ..."

I've always wondered how this plays out in practice. I might certify that I have signing authority but I most certainly do not. What happens in the US (in Delaware?) when there's a dispute?

Re: Claude Platform on AWS

#87

Post by trollbridge »

tecleandor wrote: post #68
xyzzy123 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the idea is that you can launder your team or product AI spend through your AWS account. This matters in Enterprise. It looks like the difference with Bedrock is that you access more "Claude platform" stuff than just the model. More charitably, this lets an org heavy on AWS use their existing IAM / SSO / Finops processes to manage Claude stuff, this is genuinely helpful when otherwise you have to go thru seve…

Also you can spend your commitment contracts :p

Isn’t that capped at 25%?

Re: Claude Platform on AWS

#88

Post by martinald »

hibikir wrote: post #33
abhik24 wrote: post #30

So confusing. Are they with AWS for the checkout? Because none of sentences make sense to me

There's companies out there with mid 8, possibly low 9 figure monthly AWS bills. In that world, letting people pay through said AWS pipeline gets rid of so much red tape. Supporting Bedrock was already a big winner vs OpenAI in the race for big enterprise, and Anthropic desperately wants to find any way to be sticky, as opposed to risking companies flipping a switch and telling entire departments to switch to any fut…

I get this, but isn't this a complete compliance failure?

What's the point of having all those loops to onboard vendors if you can just buy from AWS marketplace (which AFIAK is not a particularly high bar to achieve for SaaS options)?

Like imagine $POOR_QUALITY_VENDOR. If they go through the normal channels they might get shot down. If they get procured on AWS Marketplace, then it feels to me in many organisations 'its fine', though AWS does minimal checking?

Re: Claude Platform on AWS

#89

Post by cj »

xxpor wrote: post #84
adolph wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> click through EULAs Every year "don't agree to things on behalf of the company" Every day "click here to agree that ..."

I've always wondered how this plays out in practice. I might certify that I have signing authority but I most certainly do not. What happens in the US (in Delaware?) when there's a dispute?

We had a customer try to back out of a contract by claiming the person signing didn't have authority. It didn't work because the person's manager (who has authority) was included in all of the communication.

Legally it didn't matter whether the signer had authority because the way the signer's company behaved during the signing process implied that the signer had authority.

E.g. If the CTO at a company tells a vendor to "send the contract over to my product manager" then the CTO created the impression with the counterparty that the product manager has authority, and the company will be hound to the contract based on that fact regardless of whether the product manager actually has authority or not.

I'm sure it's more nuanced than this, but my understanding is actual authority is less relevant than implied authority. E.g. if you have your board of directors take away the CEO's authority to sign a contract, it doesn't automatically invalidate everything the CEO signs, since a counterparty can reasonably assume that the CEO has authority just based on their job title.

Post reply on HN