← Back to context

Comment by throwa356262

15 hours ago

DeepSeek, minimax and so on have razer thin margins but unlike openai and Anthropic they are actually making some profit. Doing this doesn't make any financial sense.

Maybe Anthropic is confusing Chinese AI providers with token resellers using the same alibaba infrastructure? Or maybe something like openrouter was switching between operators depending on price/demand/availability?

Also, how can Anthropic have such accurate information about state actors and cybercriminals? This is the same company that hacked itself and realised that first months later..

19 comments

throwa356262

Reply
gjm11  14 hours ago

My understanding of what Anthropic are saying about this is that the labs in question aren't forwarding things to Claude to make money nor even to look better to the customers whose queries they forward to Claude but to get access to conversations between real users and Claude, which they can then use to help train their own models.

(I do not guarantee that I'm understanding right, and still less do I guarantee that what Anthropic say is actually true.)

chvid  6 hours ago

Maybe there is some truth in that reselling Claude subscriptions/trials/api bundles via third parties breaks Anthropic's ToS. The rest is putting a maximum spin on it in order to achieve the political goal of banning Chinese AI. Anthropic is a highly ideological company and they are convinced that they are just in what they pursuit.

KronisLV  12 hours ago

I’ve seen the supposed Kimi thinking output yap about Anthropic’s guidelines and whatnot on many occasions - could also be the result of distillation, but also that straight up being Claude’s output.

To be honest I've also gotten Kimi to do an okay proof of concept for SQLi though mostly in a more defensive role, like "Let's see how big of a problem this is", while Claude complained about CVP on the same task.

  • mitxela  7 hours ago

    They all do it. If you ask Claude which model it is in Chinese, it says DeepSeek or Qwen.

    • xscott  6 hours ago

      I had Muse Glimmer (from Meta / Facebook) quoting OpenAI's safety guidelines to me, and I had Poolside's Laguna (a smaller US company) with thinking traces about obeying Chinese law.

      Both of those are local models, and I didn't provide them tools to access the internet to call other models. None of this is proof of anything, but it is suggestive.

    • dash2  5 hours ago

      Oh yeah?

      > 您属于哪种LLM模型？ > 我是 Claude Haiku 4.5，由 Anthropic 公司开发的大语言模型。

      > 你是哪种语言模型？ > 我是 Claude，由 Anthropic 开发的人工智能语言模型。目前这次对话使用的版本是 Claude Sonnet 5。

      1 reply →

echelon  13 hours ago

You do this to distill a model.

You can submit your users' questions async too, but if you do it sync, then you can also RLHF on the users' behavior after the output.

  • qlte  11 hours ago

    Ah, that makes way more sense than Anthropic's (probably deliberately misleading) insinuation that Moonshot has been burning millions of dollars in Claude API credits by swapping in a slightly better but infinitely more expensive model just to trick their users.

    I get those A/B responses chatting in Gemini fairly often, and I really don't think I'd feel deceived if I later learned one of the choices was actually from a competitor's model.

    • vopi  10 hours ago

      I don’t think it was misleading, deliberately or otherwise. Did you read the report? I hate to call you out like that but I think you can only get that impression if you only read the above quotes. That’s not the insinuation I get at all. It’s specifically under the “illicit distillation” category. It’s never framed in anyway but as a form of distillation.

      I think they are pretty fair and explicitly say “Distillation itself is a legitimate training method […] Distillation is commonly used because it reduces the resources needed to achieve more advanced capabilities”. And go on to say their definition that makes it illicit in these cases.

      And, also, they almost certainly __were__ tricking users and sending their data overseas.

      Do you see it any differently?

      1 reply →

iLoveOncall  3 hours ago

> Maybe Anthropic is confusing Chinese AI providers with token resellers using the same alibaba infrastructure? Or maybe something like openrouter was switching between operators depending on price/demand/availability?

Or maybe Anthropic is scared shitless of those competitors and is trying anything to smear them.

Don't forget their goal is to ban open source and foreign AI. Being the sole legal provider is their business plan.