3 ms·

Additionally, even if there is a guild - no guild ever let a vendor pick and choose what their capabilities were, that would be insanely dumb.

• estearum 5mo ago
  Vendors choose what capabilities they create and sell literally all day every day.
  • ambicapter 5mo ago
    You should read that sentence as > Additionally, even if there is a guild - no guild ever let a vendor pick and choose what [the guild's] capabilities were, that would be insanely dumb.
    • estearum 5mo ago
      But that's not true. Again: Vendors absolutely pick and choose what their customers' capabilities are. Regardless of whether "the guild allows them to." Guilds can't force people to make or sell tools against their will – obviously. The analog you're trying to describe doesn't exist, which is Anthropic saying nobody else can make and sell an offensive model to "the guild."
      • lazide 5mo ago
        Guilds often very much did assert what people could and could not build - historically. Against their will. Historically that is a major reason why guilds existed, actually. It’s an extremely modern invention that corps have these type of power over their customers.
        • estearum 5mo ago
          You've lost the thread. Here's your original claim: "no guild ever let a vendor pick and choose what their capabilities were" A carpenter's guild can prevent other people from doing carpentry. That is not what's being discussed here. A carpenter's guild cannot force a horseshoe maker to begin making hammers. That is what's being discussed. Your initial claim was analogous to "never before has a horseshoe maker been able to decline making hammers when the carpenter's guild needed hammers" Obviously they have and any other state of affairs would be flatly insane.
          • lazide 5mo ago
            That is not my example at all, if we’re talking coding agents eh?
            • estearum 5mo ago
              Your claim was that guilds have never allowed vendors to tell them what they're allowed to do. That would imply that guilds have always had the ability to force vendors to create and sell the tools the guilds wanted. That would imply that carpenters' guilds could force horseshoe manufacturers to make hammers. That is obviously not true, therefore your original claim is false. It's not true for carpenters and hammers nor for cybersecurity researchers and LLMs.
              • lazide 5mo ago
                Bwahaha. You’re really reaching there. A vendor can still do something, even if the guild wouldn’t allow them to do it, if the guild didn’t have the power to stop them. It used to be a guild vs a blacksmith (or the blacksmiths guild). Now it’s trillion dollar corps against smaller islands of un-organized individuals. That’s new regardless of how you try to argue it.
                • estearum 5mo ago
                  > basic deductive logic > "Bwahaha. You’re really reaching there." No. Customers have never been able to compel their suppliers to make or sell certain products against their will (except in collectivist regimes or like 0.00001% of natsec related instances)
                  • lazide 5mo ago
                    This conversation gets more and more bizarre, but I’ll bite. 1) pharmaceutical companies are regularly compelled to produce specific pharmaceuticals to continue to be allowed to exist. 2) hospitals are regularly compelled to treat patients even if they can’t afford treatment, if it is a life threatening emergency. 3) car manufacturers are always compelled to produce vehicles that meet a litany of safety, weight, and efficiency standards or they can’t produce at all. 4) defense contractors are regularly compelled to produce specific defense related products for long periods of time after they would otherwise have stopped, or else. 5) even your neighborhood gas station is likely compelled to provide air refills, free or at minimal cost, or else. 6) during a wartime (command) economy, which has happened numerous times in the US alone in the last 100 years, companies have to make what their customers (the people of the United States) demand or else. 7) utilities like electric utilities regularly have to give out freebies or take losses on things as demanded by regulators, at customers behest. Or if we go back a bit, blacksmiths, quarries, masons, etc. all had to deal with producing what the government/lord at the time wanted - often on penalty of death - during wartime, or just because they were ordered to do so. Seriously, what are you going on about?
  • fc417fc802 5mo ago
    A more charitable interpretation might be that a guild would not be expected to passively allow such a situation to continue to exist. I think you'd expect a guild to directly contract for the desired tools or failing that to move into production themselves.
    • estearum 5mo ago
      Sure! And Anthropic isn't preventing other people from making offensive cyber models. "The guild" is absolutely free to go seek other vendors if Anthropic declines to sell to them.
      • lazide 5mo ago
        I take it you didn’t see the announcement where Anthropic is trying to get all new development banned, so they are ‘sole source’? [https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/06/04/worlds-most-valuable-ai-start-up-calls-for-global-freeze-in/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/06/04/worlds-most-...]
        • estearum 5mo ago
          Regulatory capture: A vendor using regulation to prevent potential competitors from producing or selling competitive goods or services What we're discussing in this thread: A customer compelling a vendor to produce and sell a specific good or service Do you think these are similar? The fact that Anthropic is doing one thing (regulatory capture) is entirely irrelevant as to whether they're allowed to engage in a completely different thing (declining to sell their services/products to specific people).