Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities
901–910 of 1001 posts
Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities
#902Earlier quoted context omitted.
I guess you missed the fraud part.
Pulling out the worlds smallest violin for this case. It's just unheard of for AI companies to steal things.
> Because users’ inputs and model outputs are mediated through a proxy, users cannot verify which model their request was actually routed to. A user selects Opus 4.7, but the proxy can silently route to Sonnet, Haiku, or, in the worst case, GLM or Qwen, and fraudulently relabel the output. In a recent paper from Germany’s CISPA Helmholtz Center for Information Security (which cited my article last year on grey market!), researchers audited 17 API proxies and found widespread model swapping–API proxy access to “Gemini-2.5” achieved only 37.00% on a medical benchmark, a staggering drop from the 83.82% performance of the official API. On the user end, the tell only comes on complex tasks, when the output feels off (often referred to as 降智, or “dumbed-down”), but there is no clean way to prove it. Numerous public records highlight concerns that certain API proxies have noticeably compromised model performance. These proxies are suspected of “diluting” (掺水) services by substituting premium frontier models with inferior tiers.
> Besides model swapping, overconsumption of tokens also makes the price per token cheaper, though at the expense of driving up the total cost. Some of it is structural, as proxies that rotate accounts frequently destroy cache continuity as a side effect, forcing users to burn full-price tokens on context that would otherwise be nearly free. Some of it may be deliberate as the proxy providers try to milk more usage. The line between the two is difficult to draw from the outside.
https://www.chinatalk.media/p/how-to-buy-cheap-claude-tokens...
Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities
#903Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities
#904And lets not forget they paid you for the tokens.
Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities
#905> The strike by Alibaba is described as a "distillation" effort, which Anthropic has said involves training a less capable model on the outputs of a stronger one. I don't see what's wrong about this. > Anthropic said the campaign was conducted between April 22 and June 5, 2026, and generated more than 28.8 million exchanges with Claude through almost 25,000 fraudulent accounts. What makes the accounts fraudulent? If…
> What makes the accounts fraudulent? Fake identity? And general deception about the use
Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities
#906Earlier quoted context omitted.
The AI companies seem to take the viewpoint that everything on the internet is free, except their stuff. It's okay to hammer some random website with AI crawlers, ignoring robots.txt, and causing bandwidth costs to skyrocket. But if you cost an AI provider money with your data acquisition practices, well, that's just clearly unacceptable.
Anthropic, Dario especially seems have eternal grudge against China as a concept, that remind me of Thiel.
Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities
#907Here'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…
That is not what they are claiming, not in this article at least. It's the distillation they are complaining about.
Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities
#908Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm sure all the artists and creators they stole from had stipulations too.
Anthropic paid one billion in a copyright settlement. That's a lot of money considering they never distributed the pirated books they trained on. Nowadays they buy copies of books, train on them, and then destroy them.
Why aren't these big tech CEOs in cuffs with rifles pointed at their faces while SWAT seizes all of their computers?
Anthropic paid a billion dollars? Ridiculous.
Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities
#909“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 positionin…
Regardless of how sad late stage capitalism makes you, or how outrageous one claims to find "hypocrisy", any national security argument about limiting Chinese AI capability stands on it's own, at least for nations likely to be drawn into a war.
Also, all the local model enthusiasts who assume Chinese firms are going be allowed to endlessly release models if they have disruptive potential attributed to Mythos are probably in for a rude awakening. Just because the PRC is content about what has happened in the past doesn't mean that they would tolerate an open model that could be truly destabilizing.
Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities
#910Earlier quoted context omitted.
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).