Even if you trust Anthropic today (which I don't), they clearly don't want competition and there's no telling what other shady moves they'll pull in future.
The only sustainable way forward is to support open models. I was already on the fence about whether or not to keep my Max subscription (the extra cost over something like DeepSeek V4 didn't really feel justifiable). This is the tipping point for me, I'll be cancelling my sub before it renews at the end of the month.
It is definitely a bad idea to do this without notifying the user, because users who are incorrectly affected will have no way of providing feedback or getting support. And it is also anticompetitive, but if you truly believe that AI is not a normal technology, it is rational.
It's actually worse than it sounds initially, because Fable isn't actually omniscient when it comes to safety classification. Many people (myself included) had refusals or fallback to Opus 4.8 for seemingly compliant/innocuous requests.
Wouldn't you be pissed off if they decided to sabotage your project despite having done nothing wrong?
I don't think I agree that I should be forbidden from e.g. patching a binary to work on the latest macOS since the company behind it died and intentionally installed a time-based kill-switch (FUCK ADOBE for popularizing that practice). But ooOOooOOoo working with machine code is so cybersecurity and therefore suspicious.
Do they really believe that? Or do they just want to control this technology exclusively with moves like this and with pushing for regulatory capture after complaining about safety all the time? Didn’t Dario say that GPT2 or GPT3 would present a similar destroy the world level of danger?
- Anthropic is ran by a bunch of nut jobs.
- OpenAI is ran by a guy you can't trust.
I don't even know if we should include DeepMind, Meta, or xAi in the conversation of AI labs at this point since they can't produce models better than Chinese labs.
You want fucking nut jobs like this building models?
It's one thing to build safeguards on your model and have it prompt the user back. I'm sorry I can't help you with this request. Chinese models do this for some requests.
It's another thing to actively try to make the model perform worst for your user on purpose because it asked the model to do something you, the model creator, didn't like.
Imagine someone is asking a logical medical question and the model swaps the prompt and purpose being less intelligent and gives bad advice to this person.
How do these people not understand they are stupid.
We now all know that Anthropic CAN do that if they want to. The fact that they told you upfront about it shows that their arrogance on this self-sabotage against their customers is at stratospheric levels.
Believe them the first time, and they are not your friends at all.
https://xcancel.com/hammer_mt/status/2064839924398825798
This is so completely dishonest. But it also shows how deeply anti competitive Anthropic is. They will talk about safety but it’s not actually about safety: building features like this seems intended to hurt competition in the AI space. They don’t mind if AI helps YOUR competitor but if it means competition for them, they suddenly have a problem with it.
I don’t care that they walked this back. They’ve shown who they are. And what they’re capable of.
Neither has any hope of doing any good for the world as they don't understand evolutionary pressures. They are set up to reward making members feel smart, not accomplishing anything.
And if they ever gain any real power, they will be corrupted immediately.