6 ms·
This and threatening OpenClaw (now at OpenAI), Anthropic really on a roll making friends in Open Source. Previously discussed I think: Anthropic Explicitly Bl
by mellosouls 7mo ago
This and threatening OpenClaw (now at OpenAI), Anthropic really on a roll making friends in Open Source.
Previously discussed I think:
Anthropic Explicitly Blocking OpenCode (173 points, 157 comments)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46625918 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46625918
- LZ_Khan 7mo agoIs open source really open source if it can be bought by big companies and manipulated freely? Technically one day it can just be pulled off github.
- doc_ick 7mo ago*What makes you think it hasn’t already been pulled/used in training from GitHub?
- noemit 7mo agoDario has stated multiple times he doesn't believe there is any value in open-weight models. Not surprised. This is not the behavior of an innovative company - it is fear-driven. They are seeing a rapidly shrinking moat.
- shimman 7mo agoThe dude built a mass plagiarism machine and wants to now profit off of his mass plagiarism machine, of course he's going to have antidemocratic ideas regarding people + technology.
- hirako2000 7mo agoHis engineers told him "I don't write code anymore. Claude writes the code, I edit it, I code around it". In 6 months, people won't work anymore. They will all use my products, outsource the thinking, why bother. Oh and open weight models have no value... There is a paper out there showing 30% of CEOs/C-suite have some psychopath tendencies. Not sure if they even used the term narcissistic , but I would add delusional.
- danny_codes 7mo agoThis exactly. Kimi 2.5 has coding performance hardly discernible from Claude. The only way to maintain a business edge is to crush open source clients to force people into a closed ecosystem. Once there, create context moat where people are not in control of their own context data (cannot export it to open tooling). Maybe we can call it the Oracle play? It’ll be interesting to see if companies get tricked. I think it’s inevitable that it goes like MySQL/Postgres, where the open tools gets way better
- tim-star 7mo agothats only because kimi 2.5 was trained using data stolen from claude. it wouldnt exist without riding claudes coat tails. none of the so called 'open source' models would
- hirako2000 7mo agoThat's not true, some open weight models didn't distill Claude or other then frontier models. E.g Llama. Yet achieved comparable performance (back then in llama's case). If distillation wasn't a thing, they would certainly exist, they would have trained them from scratch or via a decent base models to remain economically viable. What's for sure is that Claude wouldn't exist if it wasn't for data stolen from millions of creators. As they found themselves admittedly guilty of.
- deaux 7mo ago> E.g Llama. Yet achieved comparable performance (back then in llama's case). At not a single point in history did Llama ever achieve comparable real-world performance to frontier models. I was around. At best they were earlier at benchmaxxing than the others.
- einr 7mo agoBoo hoo. Claude was trained using data stolen from the collective works of all of humanity. If someone does it faster and cheaper by skimming the cream off the top of Claude then surely that’s just a market efficiency in the thieves business?
- brookst 7mo agoI’m not seeing the open source connection at all? Anthropic sells a service that bundles server and client. They are not wild about people taking their server part and using their own clients because the business model relies on both client behaviors (Claude code does a lot of work to achieve > 95% cache hit rates; third party clients likely don’t) and flywheel of usage data. If Microsoft went after third party clients that emulated M365 and used their backend, would that also “make friends” in open source somehow?
- pixl97 7mo agoI mean, Microsoft started out by 'not making friends' in open source at the start. Then migrated to the embrace, extend, extinguish days. The current Microsoft is rather friendly towards open source compared to those days. Typically services that try to gatekeep standard http don't get very far with the kind of people that like to modify their software.
- achompas 7mo agoThis is both true and immaterial to Microsoft’s net profits.
- chasil 7mo agoMicrosoft actually started with Xenix, which did not have a particularly hostile stance at the time. They were the largest commercial Unix vendor of the early 1980s, and their largest platform was the TRS-80 Model 2. The cutthroat hostility didn't start until the DEC people arrived. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenix https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenix
- runako 7mo ago> threatening OpenClaw IIRC it was called Clawdbot when Anthropic complained. IANAL but I believe the holder of a trademark is obligated to defend it against infringement. Hard to say that Clawdbot was not potentially infringing, given its purpose. It's not clear how much leeway Anthropic had given his initial choice of name.
- linux2647 7mo agoI still think Anthropic should've bought Clawdbot/OpenClaw. Feels like a missed business opportunity to expand your market share by capitalizing on the hype.
- awestroke 7mo agoWhy should they pay money for such crappy software?
- DanielHall 7mo agoOpenClaw is underwhelming, and its founder is basically a hype machine.
- browningstreet 7mo agoThis whole thread is people repeating wrong facts that have been clarified 100x in the previous threads on the same issue. I wonder why conversation can never progress. When a stake goes in the ground, it never ever comes out. FWIW OpenAI didn't buy OpenClaw.
- hirako2000 7mo agoAnd Nvidia didn't buy Groq.
- browningstreet 7mo agoWhen Peter gets tired of having a boss again, OpenAI will have zero OpenClaw.
- paxys 7mo agoAnthropic's position has been consistent from the start. Subscription plans are for first-party clients. Everyone else should be on per-token billing. That's really all there is to it. It has nothing to do with open or closed source.
- ViewTrick1002 7mo agoWhich means the plans are subsidized, and you pay with your data.
- IgorPartola 7mo agoOr that API prices are inflated. We don’t get to see what their internal financials look like. My guess is that your guess is more correct but it is unclear what is actually happening.
- gck1 7mo agoThere's no chance they're able to subsidize this much. You can burn $600 of API equivalent in a day without affecting your weekly quota that much. What's likely is that light users are paying for heavy users and API pricing is heavily inflated.
- ffsm8 7mo agoYou're literally spreading misinformation. Anthropic stance has not been consistent. There are even now still articles by them telling users about unattended use like in CI which would now be considered TOS Their stance has just been clear for a year now, even if they've changed their mind in comparison to the introduction of the sub, which significantly predates Claude code
- gck1 7mo agoThere's nothing consistent with Anthropic on this matter. Their documentation, cli, SDKs, TOS, their public stance - have major contradictions and are subject to so much interpretation that you can't really figure out what's allowed and what's not. Opencode allowed? No Custom agentic harnesses allowed? Yes Opencode is a custom agentic harness? Yes, but not allowed Which agentic harness is allowed? Can I use a custom agentic harness I develop - say, tmux that runs claude code? We don't know, but you'll know if we ban you
- rvz 7mo agoI guarantee you that Cursor will be next to be targeted by Anthropic. "Safety" is just complete control for them.
- hirako2000 7mo agoThe irony given they hoped to get acquired.