[torben-friis]

They have a silent nerfing system for their models and say so openly. The obvious question is how much it is being used already.

Competitor companies being nerfed?

Non Americans getting worse code?

Punishing and rewarding users to maximize engagement, like online games do affecting victories through matchmaking?

[gck1]

No big pockets and ask it to review your own codebase for security issues? You hacker. Ban.

Anthropic simply can't be allowed to succeed. This is the most E Corp shit I've seen since I've been alive.

[Culonavirus]

Careful, someone may drop another whine article about HN being anti-ai (meanwhile nothing can be further from the truth, HN is one of the most, if not THE most, pro-AI news agg sites out there)

[port11]

It’s not pretty, but if Anthropic is the E Corp of this timeline, we’re not being creative enough. There’s better targets out there for this comparison.

[gck1]

They're just getting started, and every statement/decision they make becomes more concerning than the previous one.

Isn't it concerning that a single company unilaterally decided for the world that they're the ultimate gatekeepers and they decide who gets access to the frontier artifical intelligence and in which capacity?

Who elected Amodei to decide which projects get to have the access to a dual-use cyber model and which get a model which sabotages? How is this not straight from E Corp's rulebook?

[viking123]

Amodei is worse psychopath than Altman, and by far

[lobocinza]

Could you explain why?

[gck1]

It feels to me that Altman became humbler for the lack if a better word?

And OpenAI's general communication as of late feels more grounded, much more pleasant than Anthropic comms. They also seem to be focusing on users quite a bit more.

Anthropic's communication style feels like I somehow owe them my life or something.

This was very different a year ago.

[viking123]

Anthropic comms gives this vibe that Amodei and other goons want to be your dads.

[notrealyme123]

This send chills down my spine. For now I will not use Fable in my research. The risks of being sabotaged by the model are not worth it.

[skeledrew]

> Non Americans getting worse code?

This is a scary thought: tailoring quality based on user profile.

[zombot]

If it doesn't happen already, politicians will mandate it. "We can't allow our enemies (foreign and domestic) to use our tools against us."

[rrr_oh_man]

laughs in Google search

[cyanydeez]

$$$$$$: no nerf $$$$: a little nerf $$$: more nerf $$: are you poor? $: be permanent underclass

[cyanydeez]

hopefully no one thinks this is satire or a joke.

[canada_dry]

I re-subscribed to GPT's "PLUS" plan after ditching Anthropic for lack luster results... one of the first coding tasks I gave it resulted in a progress/thinking message that said something to the effect of (it vanished too quickly to get a screen shot unfortunately):

                   Evaluating client value  
  

It took me aback. Note: the code had nothing to do with "client value".

Behind the scenes it is not hard to imagine OpenAI, Anthropic, et al simply minimizing processing for clients - like me - that are hopping from one to another to chase the just released SOTA model.

[dannyw]

I wouldn’t over interpret this. It could be a bad summary of “what solution would be more valuable to the user?”

[nullbio]

All of the above, and it hasn't just started now. It's been happening for several years at this point.