Top
Best
New

Posted by speckx 3 hours ago

Meta and Microsoft take steps to reduce employee usage of Claude AI(www.rswebsols.com)
187 points | 197 commentspage 3
IshKebab 2 hours ago|
... in favour of their own AI tooling.

I assume this is being pounced on by "I told you so" AI skeptics. Sorry but it's not what you were looking for.

simonw 3 hours ago||
This story is re-published from https://cybersecuritynews.com/meta-microsoft-claude-ai/ (it credits that source at the bottom) but with the internal links removed.

The cybersecuritynews.com news one simply republishes details of a story published by The Information. At least they have the decency to LINK to that Information story:

https://www.theinformation.com/articles/meta-microsoft-work-...

... and of course the Information story is behind a paywall.

krauses 3 hours ago||
In other news, the CIA is limiting it's employees from submitting top secret information on KGB owned and operated websites.
irishcoffee 2 hours ago||
Wait, what? We pretended this tech would save the world and it won’t? Oh man.
zombiwoof 1 hour ago||
[dead]
rfgplk 3 hours ago||
So they're going to fall even further behind? Buying puts on Meta and Microsoft, or even better might give it to Fable to handle it for me
bitexploder 3 hours ago||
Microsoft is like $100bn deep into OpenAI.
iAMkenough 3 hours ago||
I hope leadership isn’t susceptible to falling for the sunk cost fallacy.
RealityVoid 3 hours ago|||
Who's ahead, again? Do they have a moat, or just a nice field?
pixelesque 3 hours ago||
Maybe a "ha-ha".
outside1234 3 hours ago||
Microsoft is only limiting employees to $10k a month, down from $100k a month. :)
oofbey 2 hours ago||
Absurd
rdtsc 2 hours ago||
CEO's nephew showed him how good the Chinese models are?

I am only half joking, I heard something like "my son or nephew did this cool thing with $X so we'll take $this_radical_step because of it" enough times over my career.

lumost 2 hours ago||
There is a perceived opportunity cost from someone using a lower-tier model on their task. What if the better model did a "better" job? what if my trials and tribulations are due to model quality?

If you are used to talking to opus5.5 medium, going to GPT6.1 luna low will feel like a step down. Why would any employee take the (personal) risk?

dylan604 2 hours ago||
In the video realm, it was everyone's nephew with a 5D could shoot this for $500 when getting a $20k+ quote to shoot something
VladDanGeorgesc 3 hours ago||
It may bei cost efficient, but is it wise? We use not only the big US models, but also Chinese ones. This way we can compare who makes the difference. Simplified: Knowledge comes before economic aspects.
gonzalohm 3 hours ago|
This may be seen as radical. But I think AI tools should be paid by the employee. After all, you should know how to do your work without AI.
kittomic 3 hours ago||
Should they pay for their pipelines too?

After all, they should know how to compile their software. Any automation of that process is cheating their employer.

wrxd 2 hours ago|||
Sure. Should I also pay rent for my desk at the office?
platevoltage 1 hour ago||
They're welcome to let you use the desk at your house that you own.
ungovernableCat 2 hours ago|||
You're opening yourself up to data right and privacy risks with that. My company demands that I use their enterprise account because they can claim full ownership of all produced output and have full logs of every interaction.

I think that gets legally murky, if the employee is the one who pays for the tool.

robotburrito 3 hours ago|||
The forklift should just be paid for by the employee. After all they should be strong enough to do work without one.
platevoltage 1 hour ago||
The better analogy would be "Tools should be paid for by the mechanic". Experienced ones tend to have $10K+ worth of tools that they paid for.
Avicebron 3 hours ago|||
I don't understand your logic, why would an employee pay for a tool their employer wants them to use?
NewJazz 3 hours ago|||
Yeah that only makes sense if they are a freelancer/contractor.
bayindirh 3 hours ago|||
If my employer is not forcing me to use a tool and gives me freedom, I'll be perfectly OK to use my own tools which I bought with my own money.

If my employer is putting scoreboards to see and champion who uses a tool which costs money to use, they shall pay for the tool.

Sorry, I'm not a ladder climber, yet I'm not mindless enough to bankrupt myself.

Jagerbizzle 3 hours ago|||
I could still do my job by typing all code into notepad, but companies don't charge employees for their IDE usage for a reason.
gonzalohm 1 hour ago||
And I could do my job by paying someone overseas to do it for me. Why is that not paid by the employer then?
hypfer 3 hours ago|||
Nah. Work provides the tools.

An LLM is not too dissimilar to a Work Laptop or an IDE license.

basiliobeltran 3 hours ago|||
I am fine with that if I can keep the time saved for my personal use.
iAMkenough 3 hours ago|||
I’d love it if I could bring my own computer to do my work, rather than be stuck with garbage hardware because of an enterprise agreement.
cyberpunk 48 minutes ago||
Wait, okay maybe I'm in a bubble, but every org I've worked at understood that giving us whatever hardware we want more than pays for itself, and very quickly.

I can't fathom the logic of paying 10k a month for a developer and giving them an 800 device.

Insane. Your leadership is severely broken. If you can, work somewhere that values you.

watwut 3 hours ago|||
Employer pays tools used for work. Whether they are used to speed up work or to make it possible.
platevoltage 1 hour ago|||
As someone who does have to pay for my own AI tools (if I didn't use OpenCode's free models), I agree.
frisbm 3 hours ago|||
"employees should foot the bill for tools that directly benefit their billion dollar employers"
outside1234 2 hours ago||
In California this would mean the employee would own the IP -- or at least it would be murky -- and companies and lawyers don't like murky.