14 ms·

This decision has, effectively, turned LMMs into a supply chain risk. Before this incident I’d gladly use any anthropic LLM in production features. Right now,

by baka367 3mo ago

This decision has, effectively, turned LMMs into a supply chain risk. Before this incident I’d gladly use any anthropic LLM in production features. Right now, this has become a risky decision that can tank my business overnight.

simoncion 3mo ago
> Right now, this has become a risky decision that can tank my business overnight. If your business-critical systems rely on SAAS that doesn't have a solid SLA and breach-of-contract provisions that more than cover the damages in the event, you've made "a risky decision that can tank [your] business overnight". If the software your business depends on can't run indefinitely without getting permission to operate from someone else's systems, then you're perpetually at risk of someone else tanking your business because they decided that you can no longer use that software.
- redserk 3mo ago
  Anyone doing product integrations should recognize it’s a perpetual risk but why stick to the platform that will require US citizenship demands for future models especially when there are other labs with reasonably comparable performance that don’t require this? Anthropic didn’t have to beg for the government to deem their models a security crisis.
  - simoncion 3mo ago
    > ...especially when there are other labs with reasonably comparable performance that don’t require this? This access restriction could be 1) A legitimate concern about capabilities. 2) A hype-generation scheme entered into by both the Federal Government and Anthropic. 3) Pettiness. If we're in situation #1 or #3, then there are no other LLM providers that provide comparable services that are safe from this. If we're in situation #2... well, I guess how safe you are from this is a factor of how desperately the company needs "wau, look how scary our software is!1!1" hype.
- sofixa 3mo ago
  > Right now, this has become a risky decision that can tank my business overnight. If your business-critical systems rely on SAAS that doesn't have a solid SLA and breach-of-contract provisions that more than cover the damages in the event, you've made "a risky decision that can tank [your] business overnight". I'm pretty sure that a US government export restriction / ban / etc. would count as a force majeure invalidating all the fancy wording you could wish for on a piece of paper. The only way to actually control is to self manage in an environment you control.
intended 3mo ago
The long term goal of LLMs is to automate most white collar work, so wasn’t that a risk you faced anyway? Like Amazon basics, which took all the easy to replicate goods they saw on their marketplace.
deleted 3mo ago
[deleted]

by baka367 3mo ago

simoncion 3mo ago

> Right now, this has become a risky decision that can tank my business overnight. If your business-critical systems rely on SAAS that doesn't have a solid SLA and breach-of-contract provisions that more than cover the damages in the event, you've made "a risky decision that can tank [your] business overnight". If the software your business depends on can't run indefinitely without getting permission to operate from someone else's systems, then you're perpetually at risk of someone else tanking your business because they decided that you can no longer use that software.

redserk 3mo ago
Anyone doing product integrations should recognize it’s a perpetual risk but why stick to the platform that will require US citizenship demands for future models especially when there are other labs with reasonably comparable performance that don’t require this? Anthropic didn’t have to beg for the government to deem their models a security crisis.
- simoncion 3mo ago
  > ...especially when there are other labs with reasonably comparable performance that don’t require this? This access restriction could be 1) A legitimate concern about capabilities. 2) A hype-generation scheme entered into by both the Federal Government and Anthropic. 3) Pettiness. If we're in situation #1 or #3, then there are no other LLM providers that provide comparable services that are safe from this. If we're in situation #2... well, I guess how safe you are from this is a factor of how desperately the company needs "wau, look how scary our software is!1!1" hype.
sofixa 3mo ago
> Right now, this has become a risky decision that can tank my business overnight. If your business-critical systems rely on SAAS that doesn't have a solid SLA and breach-of-contract provisions that more than cover the damages in the event, you've made "a risky decision that can tank [your] business overnight". I'm pretty sure that a US government export restriction / ban / etc. would count as a force majeure invalidating all the fancy wording you could wish for on a piece of paper. The only way to actually control is to self manage in an environment you control.

intended 3mo ago

The long term goal of LLMs is to automate most white collar work, so wasn’t that a risk you faced anyway? Like Amazon basics, which took all the easy to replicate goods they saw on their marketplace.

deleted 3mo ago

[deleted]