You don't even need to be a customer served by Anthropic or OpenAI so the Terms of Service are irrelevant. That's how I live in China and use almost free Claude and GPT which they don't sell here.
Wait, is this just something like openrouter, that routes your requests to different API providers, where you're paying per-token rates? Or is this taking advantage of fixed price plans, by offering an API interface for them, even though they're only supposed to be used with the official tools?
The whole point of these services is that it’s not your account. It’s very much anthropic’s problem, and honestly I don’t care they’re getting ripped off.
Yeah IANAL, but this sort of endorsement with undisclosed remuneration would probably run afoul of FTC guidelines, which is why you see disclaimers like "As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases" everywhere. The author seems to live in the UK, but a cursory search suggests there's something similar there as well.
I guess it’s reference to the fact that the blog writer lives in London, so the US meaning of FTC doesn’t matter when a someone in Europe promotes a US service
Now I'm curious, how is it called in the UK? I tend to use "FTC" as the general term when I want to refer to a trade regulatory body in a country, as in "UK's FTC equivalent". I wasn't aware it is so obscure?
Probably the UK CMA (Competition and Markets Authority) which regulates competition/antitrust, mergers, national security acquisitions and the like.
Or there is a loosely defined locally-run thing called 'Trading Standards' which is done at the council ("municipality") level.
and for the record I am just being difficult and everyone in tech/mildly well read knows what the (U.S.) FTC is. My point is more that one country's rules don't always matter for the operations of domestic commerce in another amongst their own citizens.
We famously mock our own jusrisprudence - "if Parliament passes a law that it is illegal to smoke on the streets of Paris, then it is illegal to smoke on the streets in Paris", so even when hard legislation exists (4chan/Ofcom shitshow?) it is meaningless.
The only power that matters long term in the universe is sheer force and hard power, and it has always been that way.
It's pretty fair to assume someone on a USA site, run by an American company, that is a major VC firm based in San Francisco, in an article talking about moving away from another USA company that is located all of 2 miles away from ycombinator, and speaking english should be able to put 2 and 2 together when dealing with contextual information.
If they can't they probably should move to an international focused site.
Maybe it technically under some regulation runs afoul. The FTC would never bother themselves with this and I don’t believe it’s in the spirit of the intent.
>There’s no need to have an executable program just to essentially unzip some files to disk
What if you need to install some registry keys? What about installing shared dependencies (redistributables)? What if you want granny to install your app and left to her own devices, it'll end up in some random folder in the downloads folder?
Most windows apps aren't sandboxed so the concept of "permissions" doesn't make any sense. The most there is is "asks to run as admin", but most installers do.
They already have one way of doing it therefore we should make a legal carve out to give them additional ways of doing it even though we don't want them to be able to in the first place.
That doesn't make sense. It's a defeatist attitude that serves only to advantage the opponent.
>Maybe if all of those companies hadn't paid large sums of money to one of the most famous child sex traffickers
Source? Specifically that they paid "large sums" after it came out they were child sex traffickers? Otherwise you can't (or should) expect companies to be doing private investigations prior to donating.
A large cage probably doesn’t need to be grounded to prevent a relatively weak signal from escaping, as attenuation would be high due to the amount of material involved. Smaller cages may radiate the signal after some attenuation.
Edit: reading some more about it, cages that are close to the radiating element may experience capacitive coupling, and this is what can cause an ungrounded cage to serve as an antenna. A larger cage, with the radiating element farther away from the cage, is less likely to experience this. In either case grounding should reduce this risk.
Well, what does it mean to be "grounded". There isn't something special about the voltage potential of Earth.
If a Faraday cage blocks interstellar signals only if one part of it is stuck in a ball of mud and rock... well, I have some questions.
There is the possibility of the ground being a return path to the transmitter, but if that were effective, radio infrastructure would interfere world-wide, and you could transmit through the earth's core. And even that argument would suggest that the Faraday cage should be floating, not grounded.
Just a typical metal mesh building material can do it. My friend has a house with an accidental Faraday cage like that. 0 bars unless you're near a window, 90% packet loss if you're near a window but not sticking the phone outside. Wifi only works if you're LOS to the access point.
>although if you use a busted microwave from the 80s it gives you good plausible deniability.
Not every radio runs off 2.4G, the frequency that microwaves would affect. Even for wifi there's 5ghz and 6ghz bands. For cellphones there are far more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5G_NR_frequency_bands
Isn't this almost certainly against ToS, at least if you're using "plans" (as opposed to paying per-token)?
reply