Imagine a compiler that emits worse binaries when it thinks you are building a competing compiler. Imagine a microscope that blurs certain samples because the manufacturer dislikes the research direction. Imagine a debugger that lies only when your codebase resembles a future rival.
That’s the world Anthropic is aspiring to.
As believers of open research, we are disappointed to see Anthropic silently degrading Fable 5 for AI development
"Any topic related to building pretraining pipelines, distributed training infrastructure, or ML accelerator design... may have limited effectiveness through Claude via methods such as prompt modification, steering vectors, or parameter-efficient fine-tuning."
Not only do they get to decide what you use LLMs for in research, but this also enables them to silently intervene in your research without you knowing.
This sets a dangerous precedent. If a model refuses openly, users can understand the boundary. If a model falls back to another model, users can still evaluate the difference. But if a model silently modifies or weakens its own answers while still pretending to help, researchers lose the ability to know whether a failed result came from their own idea, their implementation, or an invisible intervention by the model provider.
That is not safety. Safety policies should be transparent, auditable, and user-visible.
On top of that, the people most harmed by this are not the largest labs with massive teams and proprietary infrastructure. It is the independent researchers, academic groups, startups, and open-source builders who rely on public tools to compete, innovate, and pioneer AI for everyone else.
It turns out it’s not just biology and medicine, Anthropic has also decided to gate-keep math! This is as dystopian as it gets! This is the only nightmare scenario I am worried in the age of AI. Accumulation of all AI power in one company who will be the decider what you can use!
Con un amigo nos animamos a lanzar (otra vez 😅) un nuevo proyecto: https://t.co/p0hIyaoCCD
Inspirado en HackerNews, juntamos noticias de varias fuentes para que puedas comparar cómo cada medio informa sobre un mismo tema.
Algunas de sus funciones son [+]
@CryptoNotify_me It's been over a year since we've been developing @CryptoNotify_me together with @NicolasTomasin, we're eager to get your feedback!! Please try it and tell us what you think, any criticism is welcome.
The world needs more intelligence.
The amplification of human intelligence by machine intelligence will enable a new Renaissance, a new period of Enlightenment.
Prophecies of AI-fueled doom are nothing more than a new form of obscurantism.
I am not going to be drawn into the AI Doom conversation. @perrymetzger has been making many of the points I would; check out some of his threads if you want another perspective.
When ChatGPT came out I thought I wouldn't use it for learning because of its tendency to slip in some BS among 10 helpful explanations. Then I tried it, and found that it forces me to think critically about every sentence, which is the most effective mindset for learning.