I don't quite understand the business logic behind "blocking" openclaw (you can still use it at API rates) but I never saw how this was unethical. Anthropic has no ethical obligation to support other people's software
I don't quite understand the business logic behind "blocking" openclaw (you can still use it at API rates) but I never saw how this was unethical. Anthropic has no ethical obligation to support other people's software
Blocking openclaw made everyone realise that what anthropic giveth, anthropic can take away.
It is similar to the xAI gas turbines in that it tarnished their image - at least amongst those naive people who saw them as a plucky startup rather than a profit seeking corporation who don't like competition.
I agree with you that the ethics are very different.
I don't get it. On the one hand we had Steve Jobs saying "No App Store!" and everyone getting up in arms, then here we have "no obligation to have Anthropic support other people's software," and that being OK. So which is it? Or does the answer change daily depending on what makes us feel good?