Ucalegon

6 ms·

1.
by Ucalegon 3mo ago
That is not how enterprise pricing works. Not everything gets the same API model, because not everyone has the same unit economics. But lets make the sane underlying assumptions, does your business work?
2.
by Ucalegon 3mo ago
There is a difference between being able to validate a Windows license and copying Windows from source code. If we are talking about distillation vs building from scratch, none of these are congruent to Windows. I can build my own LLM [0] a
3.
by Ucalegon 3mo ago
Have you copied Windows and tried to run it? I would love to see the plain text source code that you claim to have. We all would.
4.
by Ucalegon 3mo ago
This one of the places to manufacture the consent for that to take place, because we are commenting within an organization that has given the money to ensure it that what could be is done. Most people clapped and made money, who cares what
5.
by Ucalegon 3mo ago
That might be an indication that the business is not sustainable because there is not any technical or practical differentiator besides scale. Harming your customers to maintain that differentiation isn't sustainable either.
6.
by Ucalegon 4mo ago
Its not just about the quality of output, but you also can finetune them to proprietary needs, if the skillsets are their internally, to make them better without governance risks. So being SOTA doesn't matter as much, since generalized
7.
by Ucalegon 4mo ago
[flagged]
8.
by Ucalegon 4mo ago
'Move fast and break things' has been a core ethos for so long that many have forgotten that moving and breaking without an end or a point just leads to a lot wreckage and nothing to show from it, since someone else moves fast and
9.
by Ucalegon 4mo ago
I know. I don't expect them to come up with anything, but its fun to see how far they will backtrack/change the goalposts and how much they will tie themselves into knots to try and justify their lack of integrity.
10.
by Ucalegon 4mo ago
So we have moved the goalposts to this point. I am sorry you feel this way, it does not change the facts of whats being discussed, its just that you disagree and you lacked the initial courage or intellectual capabilities to express that co
11.
by Ucalegon 4mo ago
I have already addressed this elsewhere. [0] The call to HIPAA wasn't about PII, it was about knowledge around standards and regulations such as HIPAA when it comes to application/information/network security is just baked in
12.
by Ucalegon 4mo ago
There is a fundamental difference between non-technical users from using Claude, or any other LLM, for whatever reason and whatever they produce being produced into production. There are significant reasons why an organization would not wan
13.
by Ucalegon 4mo ago
How many of those people, including yourself, actually understand what the technology is, what the risk factors are relative to your existing contracts/obligations, and how what you are doing with the technology interacts with the afor
14.
by Ucalegon 4mo ago
Does Anthropic's DPA provide indemnity to code thats produced from the product and any damages associated with security vulnerabilities within that code? We are talking about vibe coded applications by executives and the risks that are
15.
by Ucalegon 4mo ago
Cool story bro. Do you think the MSFT sales person, or anyone who has the financial incentive to innovate, doesn't want you to innovate? They want you on Azure and O365 regardless, they don't care. Hell, Microsoft will give you wi
16.
by Ucalegon 4mo ago
I am not digging, I am being consistent. But I appreciate you trying to police the expression of my deeply held beliefs, but, like, nope!
17.
by Ucalegon 4mo ago
Compliance isn't required due to a vendor. Compliance is due to the legal obligations thanks to local regulations and obligations that are defined through contracts with 3rd parties. Saying 'found the Microsoft person' expres
18.
by Ucalegon 4mo ago
What does this even mean?
19.
by Ucalegon 4mo ago
>Every executive/leader I've shown Claude Cowork to has gone from 'what is AI' to 'vibecoding whole apps' in weeks. [0] I think this is where we have the issue in my tone and approach to my comments. My resp
20.
by Ucalegon 4mo ago
VCs and investors are a massive issue, which is ironic saying that here, but once you get into contracts with other businesses, it changes things for the business and the leadership within who do carry liability when things go wrong, especi
21.
by Ucalegon 4mo ago
I do not disagree with anything you said. Generally, when it comes to 'privileged' information within an executives inbox it is business information or trust releastionships and not specific PII/PHI of an user. It was me bein
22.
by Ucalegon 4mo ago
I appreciate the feeling but this isn't so much driven by principle but by business risk through contract liability or other liability that exists within whatever place you happen to be doing business. 'Adding value' is a ver
23.
by Ucalegon 4mo ago
We are talking about one person's introduction of a technology to persons and the implications of that action within the framework of enterprise governance and risk, it is one in the same. If anything, who a person is, their knowledge
24.
by Ucalegon 4mo ago
Explicitly name them then.
25.
by Ucalegon 4mo ago
Depends on what types of apps are being built, what data they touch, and what those apps are exposed to from a network perspective. Ie; all of the fundamentals of information/network security. Generally speaking, most executives do not
26.
by Ucalegon 4mo ago
>But I'm not saying it is good or bad. Wait, you exposed people to a technology, taught them how to use it, then you are not going to own the implications of that action without teaching them about the risks or telling them how they
27.
by Ucalegon 4mo ago
The reality is, for a lot of people, they do not care about risk or implication or cost, as so long as they see things moving forward, especially if they do not understand what they are dealing with. The desire of 'build, build, build&
28.
by Ucalegon 4mo ago
>Every executive/leader I've shown Claude Cowork to has gone from 'what is AI' to 'vibecoding whole apps' in weeks. Do you, and those executives, own the risks associated with that practice? Are those risks
29.
by Ucalegon 4mo ago
Depends on the domain. There are plenty of different use cases where the data needed for training is available for personal, or non-commercial, use. At that point, it does come down to compute/time to do the training, which if you are
30.
by Ucalegon 5mo ago
Sure; https://arxiv.org/pdf/1607.06450 Depending on the model architecture, there is normalization taking place in multiple different places in order to save compute and ensure (some) consistency in output. Training, b

More ›