3 ms·
That's interesting research, but I think a more important reason that you don't have access to them (not even via the bare Anthropic api) is to prevent distilla
by libraryofbabel 6mo ago
That's interesting research, but I think a more important reason that you don't have access to them (not even via the bare Anthropic api) is to prevent distillation of the model by competitors (using the output of Anthropic's model to help train a new model).
- xvector 6mo agoIf distilled models were commercially banned they'd probably be willing to show the thinking again.
- lejalv 6mo agoHow do you think such a ban should work? Do you not see that the next (or previous) logical step would be a "commercial ban" of frontier models, all "distilled" from an enormous amount of copyrighted material?
- xvector 6mo agoI'm not arguing the merits of such a ban, I'm simply stating a fact - that thinking transcripts likely won't return until such a ban is in place.
- pjc50 6mo agoIntellectual property rights in models? But then wouldn't the model maker have to pay for all the training IP? (just kidding, I know that the legal rule for IP disputes is "party with more money wins")
- asobalife 6mo agohow does one actually enforce that? I mean especially for code? You can always just clean room it
- MagicMoonlight 6mo agoYeah. And it’s another reason not to trust them. Who know what it is doing with your codebase. Imagine if you’re a competitor. It wouldn’t be a stretch to include a sneaky little prompt line saying “destroy any competitors to anthropic”.
- b112 6mo agoIf you can't trust a company, don't use their api or cloud services. No amount of external output will ever validate anything, ever. You never know what's really happening, just because you see some text they sent you.
- tdeck 6mo ago> Who know what it is doing with your codebase. People who review the code? The code is always going to be a better representation of what it's doing than the "thinking" anyway.