3 ms·
I’m surprised that instead of cutting them off Anthropic doesn’t just switch them to a lower quality, cheaper to models. That would seem more effective than si
by Lio 4mo ago
I’m surprised that instead of cutting them off Anthropic doesn’t just switch them to a lower quality, cheaper to models.
That would seem more effective than simply shutting down the accounts.
Keep them paying for junk.
- eloisius 4mo agoThat sounds like it would actually be fraud.
- LoganDark 4mo agoNot if you simply say in the terms of service that it's allowed. Then suddenly it's normal (every company does this). Similarly to how the terms of service can simply say you're not allowed to sue.
- wqaatwt 4mo ago> how the terms of service can simply say you're not allowed to sue. That doesn’t necessarily mean much. You can put plenty of outrageous statements into any contract that automatically doesn’t make them binding.
- gf000 4mo agoIt's maybe how it works in the US, but that sure as hell not how it works in the EU (my snark wants to continue as "or any sane legislature")
- LoganDark 4mo agoAnthropic is based in the US. Unfortunately, too late to edit my comment to say "US company"
- Lio 4mo agoThat's an interesting point but I'd ask who would Anthropic be defrauding? The Chinese resellers that are happily operating outside of the terms of service? Or the reseller's customers, that are knowingly buying a potentially fake service? Or Alibaba, also using resellers to break terms of service with the aim of attacking Anthropic's business? INAL but I think Anthropic would be able to argue an "unclean hands defence" to prove they are not defrauding anyone: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_hands_doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_hands_doctrine In short, you can't knowingly break a contract and then complain that someone else is not treating you fairly with regard to that same contract.