At least on windows, closing chrome doesn't close the system tray process which keeps Chrome and Gemini prestaged and cached. Wonder if OP is experiencing a version of that on his Mac?
It's not clear what your full pipe is from your description, but if you're utilizing your Google Pro bundled quota via 3rd party tooling in any way, then you'd be vulnerable to consequences.
Your link doesn't suggest a violation of TOS, but rather a policy shift disallowing their major competitors to use their model for any use.
That thread you linked suggested they were using it with cursor as part of their development process, not for distilling.
>"Hi team, I believe many of you have already discovered that anthropic models are not responding on cursor. According to cursor this is a new policy anthropic is enforcing for all its major competitors."
Again neither of those links indicated usage that violate TOS beyond being a major competitor.
They indiacte their development staff are using it, and they access it via API, then then go on to say all the nefarious things they "could" be doing, stopping before stating they actually are.
Specifically the TOS violation was:
>customers are barred from using the service to “build a competing product or service"
So if you are building a competitive product, that alone is a TOS violation from their perspective.
Which is fine and their prerogative, but we shouldn't cast a dark cloud suggesting other violations were happening without stated evidence.
OpenAI publicly stated they can't "trust that xAI will use it within terms" not even that they've violated, not that there has been a violation from the Cursor team.
You still have access to local council posts, without logging in. You need to log in to view the follow up discussions(comments) a subtle but important distinction
For example you can view the main post and included links in incognito not logged in, just not the "discussion"
Seems X is balancing post visibility against bots, scraping, and some dark patterns that push people to sign in.
Showing everything is not viable under those competing goals. So they have settled on:
Show the post when someone has a direct link, but require login to see the discussion
Show a limited number of recent posts on a profile, and require login for more
Raising that limit from 6 to 10 would not solve the real complaint: “I cannot see communication from my city.”
They already identify government official accounts. One simple option is to extend the visible timeline for those accounts only—six months or a year of posts—while still keeping discussions behind a login.
Because Android does not just run on Pixel devices, and the level of control you suggest isn't something that can be bolted on at the manufacturer level.
They're slowly adding some of that functionality in, but obviously relies on third party adoption for anything more than UI automated control:
It definitely does. PDF is a vector-based image format historically, and all add-ons that make it behave a bit more sane as a text-oriented document format are optional, so your mileage using tools like pdftotext will vary greatly depending on who created a given PDF.
>No one commenting on the fact that oAI is releasing a Claude Mythos-class model - with apparent 0 restrictions or concerns by the US government
We don't know that it is Mythos level, it could very well be at (guardrailed) Fable or below.
This is not a wide open distribution, this is only being provided to hand picked partners, similar to how Mythos was distributed (unlike Fable which had wider distribution)
The larger question, which I don't see an answer to in this post:
1) was this tested and validated by the US Government?
2) is the list of partners vetted by the US Government?
If
This is "mythos-class"
AND
OpenAI approves SK Telecom as a trusted partner ( https://www.wired.com/story/sk-telecom-anthropic-mythos-export-controls/ )
OR
OpenAI did not get approval.
will this be shut down as quick? Otherwise, it is not really a comparable scenario.
The guardrails i.e. the classifier would also fire on Fable's output and even Fable's internals (i.e. prior to the shutdown people would see it firing when Fable got angry)
Yes, limiting the full scope of capabilities, which is why I differentiated between Mythos (unrestricted) from guardrailed.
Main point being, we have no idea the measurable capabilities of this, it could be as great or better as unrestricted Mythos, or on par with guardrailed Fable.. or just OpenAI hype that measures up to neither.
The distinction is important because if it truly is a Mythos level (or even guardrailed Fable) it in theory would require that 30 day US government validation before release as well as oversight to the approved partners allowed to use it.
Op was drawing a parallel as to why we should be outraged at the double standard, I was drawing a better parallel by which to compare.
reply