Live data from Hacker News

Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

reuters.com

871–880 of 1001 posts

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#871

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chinese companies are engaging in anti-competitive practices, as usual. They are rogue actors on the economic scene. If it were feasible, they'd be widely banned, and for good reason.

Bringing more competition is "anti-competitive" now.

Merely copying products that actual companies produce and making them cheaper is anti-competitive. There's no incentive for the products to be developed in the first place in a market if this is happening. This is why copy protections exist in civilized countries (not China and to a lesser extent India).

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#872
post #674

The hypocrisy of Anthropic complaining about "illicitly extracting its Claude AI model capabilities" and supporting the White House's accusation of China "stealing U.S. AI labs' intellectual property on an industrial scale" is hilarious. Anthropic, OpenAI, Google, Microsoft, et al trained their models by ignoring the rights of copyright holders when harvesting whatever content they could. Now one of them is crying fo…

Not really. Data mining for AI is presumably fair use, whereas when you sign up for a Claude account, you enter into a legally binding contract that says you will not distill a model based on its outputs.

I guess they can try to sue. Good luck.

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#873
post #785

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Distillation is NOT an attack. From the article - > 28.8 million exchanges with Claude through almost 25,000 fraudulent accounts wouldn't that be considered an attack? Not sure what I'm missing here.

An attack against what? The sanctity of "their IP" that is itself the result of a massive copyright violation campaign?

Has it been proved in a court of law that it is a copyright violation?

In some cases if the model regurgitates the original material then that is clearly copyright violation, but if the model "learns" from the source material just like a human brain would then that's not a copyright violation.

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#874
post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Externally subsidized predatory pricing is the opposite of a free market.

So all those companies selling at a loss to gain market share aren't part of the free market? Like openai, anthropic, and SpaceX?

If you can use mountainous capital to sell at a loss in order to distort the market, yes, that's not a "Free Market", as in, the vaguely understood competitive marketplace armchair economists idealize.

True freedom in the market means the freedom to capitulate your wealth to snake oil salesman and schemers who operate on generational timeframes until economic power consolidates and renders your society into de-facto tyranny. Before any sort of regulations existed, we were all trading shiny rocks with ultimate freedom, and that somehow has produced a bunch of economic situations in the modern day that a ton of people don't like.

What's more interesting to me is freedom from the need to have investigative journalists doing deep dives into potentially fraudulent, thieving, or scheming companies behind every purchase, and to know that what I'm granting market success to is exactly what my money or time is going towards - I'm not buying something at a loss that funds some other deliberately obfuscated project that's made opaque from my perspective of the market transaction.

The proverbial "market wisdom" doesn't emerge out of markets with extreme information asymmetry.

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#877

Here's what is happening: Chinese resellers are offering Claude tokens at 70-90% below official Anthropic API prices. They achieve this by reselling capacity from pooled Claude Max accounts, payments fraud, and also reselling the model output & reasoning chains to various Chinese labs. They are subsidizing model access in exchange for user logs and reasoning traces, which they then sell as training data, allowing the…

Why aren't these on openrouter?

Obviously because you cant join open router and start serving OpenAI / Anthropic models.

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#878
post #838
post #807

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The core of the training data is public, but the part that actually makes these models smart came from (pretty highly-paid) experts via platforms like Mercor. Claude didn't magically learn to write good code by reading all of GitHub - humans trained it in that, more or less manually.

If you pay me to curate a playlist of musical hits, can you now publish and charge people for access to that playlist (*including the curated material)? Can we do the same with movies? Books? /edit Added a note to make it more obvious that the material is included in the playlist, just like the material is incorporated as part of curated AI models.

>> If you pay me to curate a playlist of musical hits, can you now publish and charge people for access to that playlist?

If the contract was "work-for-hire" then yes, of course I can.

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#879

Here's what is happening: Chinese resellers are offering Claude tokens at 70-90% below official Anthropic API prices. They achieve this by reselling capacity from pooled Claude Max accounts, payments fraud, and also reselling the model output & reasoning chains to various Chinese labs. They are subsidizing model access in exchange for user logs and reasoning traces, which they then sell as training data, allowing the…

> This is one reason why Deepseek & GLM are priced so cheaply, they are competing with impossibly low token prices in China. They have to keep prices low, in order for people to use them. This one does not make sense to me at all. Deepseek and GLM are openweights, even US inference provider are selling them at much cheaper price. The price is cheap because the model is more efficient.

Also, wouldn't that claim only hold in China?

I'm an European and I'm not using those proxys the article describes.

Post reply on HN