- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Aww, did the serial copyright violator get copyright violated?
No, machine generated output is not eligible for copyright protection. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threshold_of_originality
Yeah, it wouldn’t be copyright. It might be trade secrets, though. And trade secrets can be made out of public data, but arranged in a way that gives competitive advantage (for example, customer lists themselves might be trade secrets, even if each entry is a publicly available set of name/contact information/job title/company).
If a company voluntarily discloses a trade secret to a member of the public, it ceases to be a trade secret, so I doubt that would apply here either.
Depends on the agreement. Contracts (like EULAs) can cover a fair bit
If your competitor can put out a model that functions really similarly to yours for $2 less per month, and your entire userbase can just leave and move to them… explain to me why investors would want to pump hundreds of billions into your business to be ‘first to market’? That’s a really dumb thing to admit for Anthropic.
Who is ‘first to 100 million users’ is utterly irrelevant under a business model where your sole value is Intellectual Property (IP) and that IP can be “illicitly extracted” by a clever competitor without ever hacking into your nextwork or doing anything explicitly illegal.
I’ve had to explain this to a lot of people who seem to think Anthropic/OpenAI are incredibly valuable companies because “they’ll make money long-term so long as they keep being pumped full of it investment cash to be the first to earn a big userbase”, but that just doesn’t make sense. OpenAI owns no datacenters…zero. Theyre 100% IP. Anthropic “is building” some datacenters, but they exist on paper only so far, so they’re also presently 100% IP.
Can this obvious scam just collapse already so I can upgrade my PC without a personal loan?
I think your take is completely reasonable but I think the ‘first to 100 million users’ is actually noteworthy because if they can become entrenched and people become unwilling to learn anything else, they’ve won and can charge nearly whatever the fuck they want (at least in the medium term). See Microsoft and Adobe. They charge whatever they want for their subscription programs because what else are you going to do, use GIMP? Even in situations where the FLOSS alternative is legitimately good, a lot of people will still refuse to switch. I don’t think Anthropic can survive long enough for them to become the only thing Susan from HR knows or is willing to use, but I think there’s a path to profit somewhere here.
There’s nothing to “learn”. Using one of these is in no way different than using the other.
Unless you start using fancy little features that let you do things the others don’t do quite as well.
No, because any cool feature will be immediatelly replicated everywhere.
This isn’t a real product. Just bullshit generator.
That’s not exactly true. The implementation details around context management matter to the user a use case. It’s totally feasible for providers to go into different directions, especially if they’re hoping to target different subsections of the same market.
They have pretty much lost already. The US will probably try to fight in some way, but they have a very little moat. Even if they actually “stole”, it’s not as if that Anthropic had the moral high ground here.
Some chinese models like GLM 5.2, Kimi K2.7 Mimo V2.5, Deepseek V4 Pro and Minimax 3 cost close to nothing and have wild usage limits if you subscribe.
You can also run these Chinese models on European infrastructure through Cortecs.ai or similar. And you have actually have privacy! Privacy + Cheap vs Expensive and slightly better.
Opus 4.6 is almost 5€ in and 24€ out. Sonnet 4.6 is 3€ in and 15€ out. Minimax 3 is 0,3€ in and 1,7€ out.
All frontier models are so good that the differenciator going forward is going to be price. The models keep improving, but there is a clear trend of diminishing returns.



