Top Comments | Hacker NewsHacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | bestcommentsloginMost-upvoted comments of the last 48 hours. You can change the number of hours like this: bestcomments?h=24.

libraryofbabel 21 hours ago | parent | context | on: Statement on US government directive to suspend ac...

So many comments here missing the big picture, and just gleefully pointing out that Anthropic got what they deserved, or that this is the natural culmination of some kind of marketing stunt.The real story here is that this may be the beginning of governments restricting the availability of strong LLMs to the public, to you. Fable was the strongest model on the market, and the US government has told you you can't use it (technically, only if you're not a US citizen, but in practice, even if you are). If you think the solution here is going to be open source Chinese models and / or running on your own hardware, think again. Do you think China is going to allow the strongest LLMs from companies within its borders to be open source a year from now when they have Mythos capabilities, if the US government is keeping the strongest American models back? Unlikely. These are heading in the direction of being powerful cybersecurity weapons and it will be in the interest of nation states to restrict and control them. In 2 years time, I would be surprised if the strongest LLMs are available for general use at all.Will we be the poorer for that, or will we be safer? I think poorer, because I hate being told what technology I can and can't use, but I'm not certain. Maybe you think the government should restrict strong LLMs. Maybe you don't. But either way, this is big news and a rubicon has been crossed and a precedent set. That's true even if the motivation for this is just the government settling scores with Anthropic.

SXX 1 day ago | parent | context | on: Statement on US government directive to suspend ac...

Finally they will pay for all the scaremongering they been doing to sell their models as something so much ahead of all else.Now they finally found the right fools in audience to believe it.

ivraatiems 23 hours ago | parent | context | on: Statement on US government directive to suspend ac...

When you spend a lot of time telling people how dangerous your products are, people who have the power to keep dangerous products off the market might listen.Especially if those people aren't presently very bright, and are already mad at you for not helping them achieve their unrelated authoritarian goals.I do not think this is somehow a 3D chess move by Anthropic. They are not masterminds, even if they'd really like to be. People who actually interact with their products know that Fable and Mythos are incremental improvements, not doomsday devices. I think this is a punitive move by an administration that loves being punitive, which they have unknowingly bolstered with their own dumb rhetoric.

asolove 9 hours ago | parent | context | on: Noise infusion banned from statistical products pu...

The replies here arguing we should publish it all are wild in the worst kind of first-order thinking way.It’s a census: it just asks questions.If you start publishing and weaponizing the data against people with various attributes, they’ll just lie or not answer. And then you are left with worse than nothing: bad data people try to act on.

ncallaway 1 day ago | parent | context | on: Statement on US government directive to suspend ac...

It seems more likely that the logical conclusion is the executive branch is mad at Anthropic, and lashing out at them with any convenient tool that they have.I suspect if OpenAI or Grok was operating at the same level they wouldn’t find themselves on the sharp end of the government stick

niuzeta 2 days ago | parent | context | on: If you are asking for human attention, demonstrate...

A very prolific coworker who fully embraced claude has inflicted the team with a flood of AI-generated PRs. About six months later, it is his frequent bemoaning at the standup that their PR don't get reviewed, languishing in inattention. I don't think anyone - including myself - _intentionally_ avoid his PRs. It's just that he doesn't make it easy for the team to look at.This single headline perfectly captures what I have been thinking. It's not that I reject AI content, but it takes _effort_ to review and weed out any mistakes. When your thoughtful reviews that take an hour(because the PR is typically large, and you want to be _right_ when you're pointing out a hallucination) gets an AI-generated response with AI-generated amendments, It doesn't feel _nice_. I feel dismissed and it has continuously trained me to subconsciously avoid his PRs. After all, the team is fully onboarded with AI, so it's not like there is a lack of PRs to review.It looks like the sentiment isn't just isolated for me.

xp84 1 day ago | parent | context | on: "Don't You Just Upload It to ChatGPT?"

The ending is a really...