← Voice corpusEdition 2026-10-10, preview.
XPost

Source item

Open original source ↗
In a democracy, it’s absolutely ok to define who can use the things you make and how. But it’s also absolutely ok for the Government to lose trust in you, tell you to fuck off and find an alternative. It’s also absolutely ok for you to nuke your own company in the process. The timing of this is not good for Anthropic and could be a potential boon to every other model that is exceeding expectations in their upcoming version (Grok, OAI, Gemini). More generally, I don’t see how this isn’t a slippery slope. What if a model maker updates their ToS that would block a use case that is legal but subjective? Agreeable in some states but not in others? What about in different countries with different governance or religions? It’s a huge can of worms. How can a government or company rely on a model that could have an ever-changing definition of what’s allowed without taking on major business/governance risk? They won’t. My hunch is that the company that embraces the “no holds barred” ToS will win because it’s the least risky to adopt wrt long term risk of getting rug-pulled.
Library as of 2026-10-28