Amazon Devs "Tokenmaxxing", SpaceX & Google Collab, Anthropic Legal Fight  🔗 **Source:** [Amazon Devs "Tokenmaxxing", SpaceX & Google Collab, Anthropic Legal Fight](https://share.snipd.com/episode/87cc7d22-1b4b-444c-96a8-9de61247f5da) ## Highlights - **Anthropic Calls Out Unauthorized Secondary Share Platforms** - Anthropic publicly named eight secondary platforms and said sales through them are void and won't be recognized on its books. - Platforms named include Open Door Partners, Unicorn Exchange, Patchamana Capital, Lionheart Ventures, Hive Forge, Global, Sidecar, and Upmarket. Transcript: Jaeden Schafer We'll kick this off with the Anthropic investment deal. So essentially, Anthropic is publicly disavowing, they're calling out, and they're naming names, by the way, of eight different investment platforms that are marketing access To their shares. Basically, they're like, hey, you want to get access Anthropic shares? We have some. Usually, these are companies that went and purchased them on the secondary market or through other ways where technically they control the shares, but it was like an employee that Sold it to them. It wasn't really from Anthropic. Anthropic doesn't like that because they're like, hey, if you want to get access to our shares, come buy it through us. The notice that they were just putting out came out today. They named Open Door Partners, Unicorn Exchange, Patchamana Capital, Lionheart Ventures, Hive Forge, Global, Sidecar, and Upmarket. And all of them, they actually put out a whole quote and they said, any sale or transfer of Anthropoc stock or any interest in Anthropoc stock offered by these firms is void and will not Be recognized on our books and records. They are specifically banning SVPs as a vehicle. And obviously, the timing of this is really important as they have their IPO coming up. Anthropic is getting ready to close their $900 million valuation round. They don't want people to sell shares for more or less than that and take any sort of appetite away from the investors that they're trying to get. Forge Global specifically kind of pushed back on this. They said that they don't, quote, intermediate trades, a company hasn't blessed, and they're asking to be removed from the alert that Anthropic put out. So at least one of these eight has a legitimate complaint. I think the bigger problem is what nobody is talking about, and that is that there's a bunch of crypto exchanges, one of them being OKX, there's a bunch of others, and they've basically Been listing pre-ipo perpetual futures basically they're just an imaginary fake stock that track anthropics valuation without ever touching the actual stock price and right now When they're doing these private rounds of funding they'll just peg it to whatever the most recent private round of funding is but in the future as it's even publicly traded you can imagine It could just keep tracking the stock price there those all sit outside of this kind of disavowal because they actually never need to transfer any sort of shares, right? Someone could sell their secondary shares to someone else and Anthropik's like, we won't, you know, we're not going to like honor that. I don't really know how legal any of that is, although Anthropik seems to think they can just, you know, ignore those. But what they can't do is they can't stop these quote unquote synthetic traders, these crypto platforms, these other platforms that are just making synthetic anthropic pegged prices. And you're just buying and selling at that price from other people that are interested in it. I mean, it's kind of a crazy concept, but there's not much they can do about it. ([Time 0:01:51](https://share.snipd.com/snip/82e5d10f-f106-4484-8206-36c830f32166)) - **Synthetic Crypto Markets Evade Company Controls** - Anthropic can't stop crypto platforms issuing synthetic perpetual contracts that track its valuation without touching real shares. - These synthetic markets can peg to private rounds now and remain outside Anthropic's disavowal power. Transcript: Jaeden Schafer So at least one of these eight has a legitimate complaint. I think the bigger problem is what nobody is talking about, and that is that there's a bunch of crypto exchanges, one of them being OKX, there's a bunch of others, and they've basically Been listing pre-ipo perpetual futures basically they're just an imaginary fake stock that track anthropics valuation without ever touching the actual stock price and right now When they're doing these private rounds of funding they'll just peg it to whatever the most recent private round of funding is but in the future as it's even publicly traded you can imagine It could just keep tracking the stock price there those all sit outside of this kind of disavowal because they actually never need to transfer any sort of shares, right? Someone could sell their secondary shares to someone else and Anthropik's like, we won't, you know, we're not going to like honor that. I don't really know how legal any of that is, although Anthropik seems to think they can just, you know, ignore those. But what they can't do is they can't stop these quote unquote synthetic traders, these crypto platforms, these other platforms that are just making synthetic anthropic pegged prices. And you're just buying and selling at that price from other people that are interested in it. ([Time 0:03:12](https://share.snipd.com/snip/69730ed5-7cd0-4372-ad27-acda012c785d)) - **Human Consent Registry Is Only As Strong As Provider Buy-In** - The Human Consent Standard registry aims to let people declare which AI systems can use their likeness, like a robots.txt for people. - Its effectiveness depends on major model providers voluntarily checking the registry at training time, and none have committed yet. Transcript: Jaeden Schafer Okay, the next thing I want to talk about is what is called the human consent standard for AI. So RSL Media launched this today. And a bunch of, you know, big celebrities have gotten on board with this George Clooney, Tom Hanks, Meryl Strepp, Viola Davis, Kristen Stewart, anyways, a whole bunch of people, a bunch Of different creative artists and, you know, people so in the movie industry and the music industry, this is a registry that is going to go live in June where you can verify your identity And you can publish what AI systems are allowed to do with your likeness, your voice, your character and your work. So this is kind of like a discovering mechanism. It's kind of like robots.txt. It's the same file and websites are already using this to gate scrapers. So like Google, you can say you put in your robot.txt on your website, like, hey, Google, don't scrape my website. And even AI models don't scrape my website, and it will kind of stop them. I mean, assuming they actually listen to you. So this is kind of a similar idea. So RLS media co founder, Eric Walter framed this and said, basically, quote, the human consent standard applies to the underlying work identity character or mark itself wherever It appears. So it's not, you know, like gatekeeping a URL like a robot.txt file would do. It's basically gatekeeping the person. Their pitch is that it's going to work for long tail to not just famous people. So, you know, anyone, even if you're not famous, you can kind of gatekeep your stuff, your likeness from being used by AI. I think if you're being honest with this concept, I'm trying to be a realist on this and maybe a little bit skeptical, but robot.txt really doesn't have any teeth, any well-behaved web Crawler like Google is going to honor it, but bad ones don't, right? Every AI model of China is going to scrape the entire internet. They don't care if you have a do not index, right? They're just going to get their stuff. There's no consequences, they're going to get all the data they can. I think the leverage right now comes when major model providers are going to kind of commit to checking the registry at training time, and zero have publicly committed yet that they're Actually going to do that, right? Like, if they're like, okay, there's a million people that have put their likeness and image inside of this thing, make sure that none of your data coincides with any of these people's Likeness. And if Anthropic and OpenAI and 11 Labs and Google, all of them are like, okay, we're going to do this, that'd be fantastic. But right now, no one's really opted into that. ([Time 0:04:19](https://share.snipd.com/snip/6af2c77d-c9af-4856-acf2-c79af73db1a5)) - **Register Likeness Now To Build Legal Leverage** - Do register likeness and voice in the Human Consent Standard if you want a clear paper trail for future legal claims. - Expect its main value early to be leverage when major AI providers voluntarily honor the registry. Transcript: Jaeden Schafer It's kind of like robots.txt. It's the same file and websites are already using this to gate scrapers. So like Google, you can say you put in your robot.txt on your website, like, hey, Google, don't scrape my website. And even AI models don't scrape my website, and it will kind of stop them. I mean, assuming they actually listen to you. So this is kind of a similar idea. So RLS media co founder, Eric Walter framed this and said, basically, quote, the human consent standard applies to the underlying work identity character or mark itself wherever It appears. So it's not, you know, like gatekeeping a URL like a robot.txt file would do. It's basically gatekeeping the person. Their pitch is that it's going to work for long tail to not just famous people. So, you know, anyone, even if you're not famous, you can kind of gatekeep your stuff, your likeness from being used by AI. I think if you're being honest with this concept, I'm trying to be a realist on this and maybe a little bit skeptical, but robot.txt really doesn't have any teeth, any well-behaved web Crawler like Google is going to honor it, but bad ones don't, right? Every AI model of China is going to scrape the entire internet. They don't care if you have a do not index, right? They're just going to get their stuff. There's no consequences, they're going to get all the data they can. I think the leverage right now comes when major model providers are going to kind of commit to checking the registry at training time, and zero have publicly committed yet that they're Actually going to do that, right? Like, if they're like, okay, there's a million people that have put their likeness and image inside of this thing, make sure that none of your data coincides with any of these people's Likeness. And if Anthropic and OpenAI and 11 Labs and Google, all of them are like, okay, we're going to do this, that'd be fantastic. But right now, no one's really opted into that. It's just more compliance. It's not legally mandated. I think if basically none of them do it, then it's just kind of a paper trail for the next round of lawsuits. And so anyways, a lot of people are basically saying that this is a big nothing burger that nothing will happen. But you have a lot of big celebrities backing it. So we'll see if this gains any traction. ([Time 0:04:55](https://share.snipd.com/snip/ecd7e6d5-b8ee-4933-a1f9-0c64dd69cc9b)) - **Token Metrics Create Perverse Incentives At Amazon** - Amazon's MeshClaw dashboard tracks token usage and set targets pushing engineers to inflate AI token consumption. - Engineers run MeshClaw loops to 'token max' because token counts became a visible KPI tied to incentives. Transcript: Jaeden Schafer Their engineers right now have basically been given a target to have more than 80% of developer code written by AI. Now, theoretically, this sounds awesome. But whenever you give people incentives, they're always going to use they're going to find a ridiculous way to hit those targets to reach their incentives. Anyways, the way that this is happening right now is that Amazon recently rolled out something called MeshClaw. It's basically a clone of OpenClaw. It connects to Slack, email, and code deployments. They give this to all of their developers, and they also set up a dashboard that tracks how many tokens each engineer is burning. By the way, I'll also, as a caveat, say that over at NVID Jensen Huang, the CEO said, Hey, look, if I'm hiring a developer, and I'm paying them $250,000 a year, they better be using at least $250,000 a year in tokens. Otherwise, I don't know why I'm paying them. So we kind of have this as a backdrop from you know, the top people in tech. And so all these developers are now incentivized to run up the biggest bills possible. So what's happening, according to the Financial Times, they got some source documents today. Employees are now running MeshClaw, this new thing that Amazon rolled out, in loops to inflate their token counts. They're calling it token maxing. So one Amazon employee quoted in this report, quote, Some people are just using MeshClaw to maximize their token usage. Managers are looking at it. When they track usage, it creates perverse incentives, and some people are very competitive about it. So Amazon says that token stats aren't supposed to factor into performance reviews. I don't think anyone actually believes that, especially when you have comments like that coming out of NVIDIA. Meta employees apparently are doing the exact same thing. I think the reason that that's happening is because Amazon is expected to spend 200 billion in capex in 2026 most of it is going to be on ai infrastructure and i think a lot of the executives Need you know kind of a number to point to when the board asks if you know their spend is producing change so i think the lesson i'm getting from all of this um and this is something that i Think has been true for many many years. When you measure something, it becomes a target and it stops becoming a measure. So if you're at a company and, you know, AI usage is a mandate, you can watch and everyone's going to start and, you know, you're measuring that everyone's going to start using more AI Usage. Are they going to use it for useful things? Are they going to run it in loops? I think token count is a pretty bad signal, much worse than shipped code maybe, or maybe like closed tickets or resolved customer issues. But anyways, any sort of metric you put out there could be gamed in some way and people will game it, which is ridiculous. I think the companies that are getting really solid productivity right now, they're kind of measuring outputs. And then you get the companies that are just measuring your token maxing. So probably not a metric I would encourage people to rely on. ([Time 0:07:06](https://share.snipd.com/snip/1b27737e-7f76-4344-bd6e-92b0f23e8aae)) - **Measure Outputs Not Token Usage** - Avoid using raw token counts as a productivity metric because Goodhart's Law makes them targets to be gamed. - Prefer output metrics like shipped code, closed tickets, or resolved customer issues instead of token usage. Transcript: Jaeden Schafer When you measure something, it becomes a target and it stops becoming a measure. So if you're at a company and, you know, AI usage is a mandate, you can watch and everyone's going to start and, you know, you're measuring that everyone's going to start using more AI Usage. Are they going to use it for useful things? Are they going to run it in loops? I think token count is a pretty bad signal, much worse than shipped code maybe, or maybe like closed tickets or resolved customer issues. ([Time 0:09:05](https://share.snipd.com/snip/eab4767b-3e41-4186-bcf4-c4c596f26c8b)) - **Anthropic Targets Legal Market With Connectors** - Anthropic is attacking legal AI startups by bundling Claude with connectors to DocuSign, Box, and Westlaw. - Their strategy sells Claude plus integrations so firms keep stacks while gaining model grounding for legal work. Transcript: Jaeden Schafer And I actually have some friends high up at some big AI, some big software legal AI firms. And they're pretty, honestly, pretty rattled by a lot of the stuff that Anthropic is putting out. So just today, Anthropic dropped a big expansion of Cloud for Legal. They're going straight for the two best funded legal AI startups. Harvey has raised $200 million in March at an $11 billion valuation. Logor closed a $600 million Series D last month, and they had a big, huge ad campaign, which was fronted by Jude Law. That's about a billion dollars in fresh capital just in this one particular industry. Anthropic's response to all of this, I mean, Anthropic and everyone else is seeing, look, so much money is going into this industry. There's probably a lot of money in this industry. And so they are basically going to stack a new MCP connector that plugs Claude directly into DocuSign for document management, into Box for file search, and into Thompson Routers Westlaw For case law research. All paying Claude tiers are going to get this. So it's not just for lawyers, but the plug-in suite covers commercial privacy, corporate, employment, product, and AI governance work. And I think the strategy here is really interesting because Harvey and Lagora are basically selling vertically integrated platforms built specifically for law firms. And Anthropic is selling Claude plus some connectors. So firms can basically keep their existing documents, their existing kind of research stack. And this is kind of interesting because it's kind of like a model versus platform fight. And I don't think any startup really wants to be fighting with Claude or with OpenAI right now. But it's not kind of like a feature versus feature one, right? There's a spokesperson over at Anthropic that kind of talked about the legal sector. And they said that it is, quote, facing mounting pressure to adopt AI and the firms and in-house teams that move are pulling ahead fast. I think the reason right now that the market is so important for Anthropic, this legal market, is because it's number one, really text heavy. They have the billable hour work, which is kind of the exactly, the exact kind of surface area that generative AI is really good at. It's also where hallucination has been, you know, the most costly, like you can't have anything hallucinate. So California recently fined a lawyer who used Chagipty to draft an appeal full, it had a bunch of fake quotes in it. And so they actually got a lot, you know, they got a fine there. So Anthropics pitch rate now is they're like, look, we have our model, It's great, but it's also grounded in, you know, the Westlaw kind of data set. And they, you can also use your own firm's documents. And between the two of that, you should reduce your errors significantly. I think it's going to be interesting to see if they're able to really get some strong usage out of a lot of the legal firms. From what I'm hearing from friends in this industry, Anthropic is probably going to mop the floor with this one. I think a lot of people love it. Now, is it going to kill every other AI legal software? No, absolutely not. I think people are going to be able to go way deeper than Anthropic because Anthropic is trying to hit 100 verticals and if Anthropic focuses too heavily on this, I think it probably will Distract them from other areas like you saw with OpenAI getting distracted with Sora and 100 other little products that let Anthropic run past them. So I think they should focus on the core product of making Claude better for everybody. ([Time 0:09:59](https://share.snipd.com/snip/f5497169-38b3-4e70-9c6f-bf955c1d21a0)) - **Law Is Prime Territory Because Grounded Models Cut Risk** - Legal AI demands low hallucination and benefits from model grounding; Anthropic pitches Claude grounded with Westlaw plus firm docs to reduce errors. - The billable-hour nature and text density of law makes it an attractive, high-value AI use case. Transcript: Jaeden Schafer So just today, Anthropic dropped a big expansion of Cloud for Legal. They're going straight for the two best funded legal AI startups. Harvey has raised $200 million in March at an $11 billion valuation. Logor closed a $600 million Series D last month, and they had a big, huge ad campaign, which was fronted by Jude Law. That's about a billion dollars in fresh capital just in this one particular industry. Anthropic's response to all of this, I mean, Anthropic and everyone else is seeing, look, so much money is going into this industry. There's probably a lot of money in this industry. And so they are basically going to stack a new MCP connector that plugs Claude directly into DocuSign for document management, into Box for file search, and into Thompson Routers Westlaw For case law research. All paying Claude tiers are going to get this. So it's not just for lawyers, but the plug-in suite covers commercial privacy, corporate, employment, product, and AI governance work. And I think the strategy here is really interesting because Harvey and Lagora are basically selling vertically integrated platforms built specifically for law firms. And Anthropic is selling Claude plus some connectors. So firms can basically keep their existing documents, their existing kind of research stack. And this is kind of interesting because it's kind of like a model versus platform fight. And I don't think any startup really wants to be fighting with Claude or with OpenAI right now. But it's not kind of like a feature versus feature one, right? There's a spokesperson over at Anthropic that kind of talked about the legal sector. And they said that it is, quote, facing mounting pressure to adopt AI and the firms and in-house teams that move are pulling ahead fast. I think the reason right now that the market is so important for Anthropic, this legal market, is because it's number one, really text heavy. They have the billable hour work, which is kind of the exactly, the exact kind of surface area that generative AI is really good at. It's also where hallucination has been, you know, the most costly, like you can't have anything hallucinate. So California recently fined a lawyer who used Chagipty to draft an appeal full, it had a bunch of fake quotes in it. And so they actually got a lot, you know, they got a fine there. So Anthropics pitch rate now is they're like, look, we have our model, It's great, but it's also grounded in, you know, the Westlaw kind of data set. And they, you can also use your own firm's documents. And between the two of that, you should reduce your errors significantly. I think it's going to be interesting to see if they're able to really get some strong usage out of a lot of the legal firms. From what I'm hearing from friends in this industry, Anthropic is probably going to mop the floor with this one. ([Time 0:10:10](https://share.snipd.com/snip/257ae702-c860-4583-ad25-ccd0757c019d)) - **Orbital AI Data Centers Will Reshape AI CapEx** - Google and SpaceX are negotiating orbital AI data centers as part of SpaceX's IPO pitch to buyers. - Project Suncatcher and SpaceX launches aim to offload compute costs into space, changing future CapEx planning for AI firms. Transcript: Jaeden Schafer This is probably one of the wildest stories today, the Wall Street Journal has reportedly said that Google and SpaceX are in active talks to launch AI data centers into orbit. The timing of this obviously is trying to coincide with the IPO. SpaceX is prepping their $1.75 trillion IPO, which is going to happen later this year. People have been talking about this IPO for many, many years, because SpaceX has just been such a growing, it's been basically the most valuable private company. Stripe was giving it a run for the money a while ago. And now they've just made all these acquisitions. They got XAI and X in there and all these different assets and Starlink. So it's, you know, ballooned to close to $2 trillion. Okay. But a big part of this is this kind of orbital compute piece to it. And so it feels like Anthropic just leased a bunch of, you know, a bunch of compute from SpaceX over in Memphis. And in addition to all of the Memphis compute, they're also saying, hey, look, maybe we'll get some of these, this orbital compute. And I think maybe SpaceX, I mean, the big strategy here is that the orbital compute is a big part of their pitch. And so if they're saying, look, Anthropica wants to buy it from us, Google wants to buy it from us, they can start lining up all of these different people. Google has something called Project Suncatcher, which is a compute satellite program that Google announced late last year. And the prototype satellites are slated to fly next year in 2027. And the SpaceX talk is going to give the suncatcher basically dedicated launch capacity at scale. So this is interesting. I think Google is also talking to some other launch providers to kind of hedge this. But SpaceX is kind of the big one because they've been able to launch the most satellites into space. The most advanced space program, yada yada. If you're building anything that relies on the cost of compute for AI, then, I mean, the thing we're all gonna have to start thinking about here pretty quick is the cost of launching satellites Into space. That's gonna be a variable that will have to be included in thought about during, when you're doing your CapEx planning. It's super crazy. ([Time 0:14:42](https://share.snipd.com/snip/31634605-5ccb-471e-86de-9cb612f486ff))