Anthropic's policy of keeping enterprise data for 30 days under the guise of safety is actually a power grab, Jonathan argues. Companies should own their own AI and data instead of handing proprietary information to an external provider that might train on it later.
Anthropic was basically posturing that, hey, this is a really advanced model coming into the world. It's so capable that nefarious actors might use it for bad and evil, so it could cause harm. So they're posturing that safety leads us to need to take your data. That's basically what they were saying. In the release of this super dope product, we're going to have to take your data and potentially your harness or IP or how you're using our product. That goes against the whole, probably a bunch of enterprises that signed zero-day retention policies with them. There's a thought experiment there, which is what if we had some way where you owned your own data? Would this have ever been a problem? And Jonathan, I want to tee you up for that. Uh, you have a lot of thoughts here, especially with the topic of self-models and digital twins and owning your own data, your own harness. Could you go into that more?
This takes us to like the Satya Nadella post. I was kind of like, why did he write this now? And with the premise of it was that like there's a future frontier without an ecosystem is not stable. What it really pointed to is that Enterprises could use data within their organizations to create these cognitive loops and to create basically moats, competitive advantages with their domain expertise, the human capital combined with the token capital. And what the last Fable release did was that Anthropic kind of inched over the line and it said, okay, for the first time, we're going to take proprietary data, which is your data, the enterprise customer, and we're going to store this on our servers for 30 days as a protection. Mechanism. So I think Anthropic's probably looking at this from the standpoint of like, we're putting out a model that could be kind of dangerous. Let's create like an accountability log in case like somebody's making bioweapons or something like this as a safety mechanism. And every enterprise is thinking, dude, that is our IP. What do you think you're doing? I think this is actually the underlying story of why all this is happening is that Anthropic overstepped their bounds and they didn't recognize the sovereignty of the IP, the intellectual property of these companies. And they said, we're going to store data on our servers. And that's probably a reasonable policy from like a safety perspective, but it's starts to like raise all kinds of flags inside the boardrooms of these companies who are adopting AI. How can we let another company have our proprietary data under any circumstances? We signed an agreement saying that they can't have the data and now they're trying to take it. And this is only the first step. Maybe the next step after that, they're going to start including our data in their training models.
