U.S. allows Anthropic to release Mythos AI to ‘trusted’ US organizations

https://www.semafor.com/article/06/27/2026/us-releases-powerful-anthropic-model-mythos-to-some-us-companies

by bobrenjc93 • 26 days ago

553 729 26 days ago

semafor.com

https://archive.md/ArXuF

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/us-government-gives-a...

tristanj• 26 days ago

Original source: https://www.semafor.com/article/06/27/2026/us-releases-power...

enraged_camel• 26 days ago

@dang can you change it?

jauntywundrkind• 26 days ago

* to some US companies.

Asterisk the size of a Mac truck.

Also this administration having say over who gets access to what AI is just so much more grift corruption and picking your favorites / destroying others, for these incdecent undemocratic in American grifters who've seized our state.

wolvoleo5• 26 days ago

If this is the way things are now, isn't that going to crash the AI stocks? All those trillions dumped into it probably weren't with the expectation that it could only be sold to a handful of select US agencies and corporations.

thrwaway55• 26 days ago

They are all private aren't they? There's nothing to crash since the valuations were all made up funny raise numbers anyway. A donation to the right person likely removes the restrictions

bayarearefugee• 26 days ago

If this is the way things are now, isn't that going to crash the AI stocks?

Maybe, maybe not. Tech stocks are mostly vibes-based now, reality isn't really a concern for them.

SpicyLemonZest5• 26 days ago

Depends on how much of an overhang there is with the power of existing models. Have we discovered 10%, 50%, or 90% of the valuable applications for Opus 4.8 / GPT 5.5? Hard to be confident at this point.

tracerbulletx• 26 days ago

Imposing a licensing system on models for limiting domestic use should require an act of congress but I mean obviously we're well past that red line.

coffeemug• 26 days ago

Regulatory agencies limit uses of other products without acts of congress-- cigarettes, vapes, drugs, pesticides, chemicals, explosives. Even firearms, despite a constitutional amendment! Why not models? (Note I am not arguing it's a good idea; I'm making a narrow argument that there is precedent.)

EDIT: I agree that it should require an act of Congress to explicitly delegate this power.

verelo2• 26 days ago

None of those things are knowledge. I think theres something specific around limiting access to knowledge and capabilities that makes this feel insidious.

UncleEntity• 26 days ago

Fairly certain all those have "acts of congress" attached to them. I mean, it used to take a constitutional amendment to make something illegal but now we have tons of agencies responsible for regulating all the things.

Plus, they're relying on the "math is a weapon" law to ban "export" of the models.

standardUser2• 26 days ago

All of the agencies responsible for those regulations were created by and get their funding from Congress. Currently, they're asleep at the wheel. Or a better idiom might be "cowering in the corner".

tzs• 26 days ago

Regulatory agencies limit uses of other products without acts of congress-- cigarettes, vapes, drugs, pesticides, chemicals, explosives.

Every one of those is by a regulatory agency that was explicitly empowered by Congress to do such regulation.

sigmar• 26 days ago

The ATF was created by an act of congress. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_Control_Act_of_1968

jiggawatts• 26 days ago

"Malboro cigarettes may once again be sold, but Newport remains banned for everyone except large purchasers that have paid the appropriate bri... fees."

tick_tock_tick2• 26 days ago

I agree that it should require an act of Congress to explicitly delegate this power.

Should ever new "weapon" invented require a new act of Congress? We've considered software subject this act since the 90s.

If everyone making AI is screaming up and down that we are in an AI arms race creating dangerous entities that will determine the fate of the world is the government just supposed to ignore them?

motbus3• 26 days ago

I wonder what kind of emergency will happen when real elections get around

tiahura• 26 days ago

They did. Defense Production Act (50 U.S.C. § 4511 );Export Control Reform Act, 50 U.S.C. § 4812 are just two of them.

tchalla• 26 days ago

Do you remember the export controls on Covid vaccine material during the height of coronavirus? I do

actionfromafar5• 26 days ago

Overturning the Chevron doctrine is good because it stops lawful people from doing things we don't like. We aren't bound by laws, so we can do whatever we want.

-- GOP probably

twoodfin5• 26 days ago

The Chevron doctrine gave more power to the executive agencies of the current administration, so I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make.

az2262• 26 days ago

And even if a court places an injunction on the ban, it's possible Anthropic will still choose to keep it unavailable.

frogperson• 26 days ago

Who needs freedom of speech anyway? I'm just glad the trump admin is looking out for by best interests. /s

truthbe2• 26 days ago

Sarcasm Detected, -40 Ameripoints have been deducted from your account. Have a nice day!

Hawkenfall• 26 days ago

This appears to be only for Mythos 5 access, NOT Fable 5.

sourthyme• 26 days ago

Aren't these the same models?

paxys2• 26 days ago

Mythos doesn't have the strict safeguards of Fable and is only accessible by a very small number of pre-approved companies.

aesthesia2• 26 days ago

Under the hood, yes, but Mythos had more relaxed safeguards and was/is only available to a subset of approved customers under Project Glasswing, similar to the situation with GPT-5.6 now.

qsxfthnkp23225• 26 days ago

Fable was available to me as a normal person using Claude.ai

Mythos never was and I don’t think that’s changing.

irthomasthomas• 26 days ago

So only 100 companies have exclusive access to frontier AI.

andsoitis4• 26 days ago

So only 100 companies have exclusive access to frontier AI.

Only the frontier AI labs have true access to frontier AI. Everyone else gets a reduced version.

pertymcpert• 26 days ago

Why would they allow Mythos but not Fable? Fable is the one with more guardrails.

nozzlegear4• 26 days ago

To quote famed businessman and philosopher Eugene Krabs: "Money."

layer8• 26 days ago

They only allow it for specific companies and agencies, which are trusted with the less restricted model. The general public is still not trusted to use Fable, apparently.

LoganDark2• 25 days ago

The ban was on "Mythos-class models" which unfortunately includes Fable regardless of guardrails.

__natty__2• 26 days ago

And we get the news the same time OpenAI releases 5.6. What a coincidence?

mrandish• 26 days ago

I think they kind of had to since they allowed OpenAI to do a 5.6 "preview to trusted parties" today. The other driver is that the DoD/NSA wanted to get access to Mythos again. I figure OAI will now do several weeks of 'preview' like Anthropic did with Mythos. When OAI wants to release 5.6 wider to actually start making money with it, I expect Fable will get approved the same day.

Back when the administration hit Mythos/Fable with the surprise ban, I figured this would be the endgame. They'd keep Anthropic tied up until a competitor had a roughly comparable model ready, then gate them the same.

sscaryterry• 26 days ago

I thought Fable was a "safer" Mythos?!

dchftcs• 26 days ago

I suppose the point is that Mythos was released to a smaller set of partners anyway and Fable is for the masses.

zuzululu• 26 days ago

should see 5.6 any day now

skywhopper2• 26 days ago

Why post a content free link to Twitter for this?

nozzlegear4• 26 days ago

Wowee, just happens to be on the same day of OpenAI's Sol announcement. How convenient for Dario and Anthropic!

__natty__2• 26 days ago

That’s exactly what I was thinking. Feels like someone is playing a high-stakes game, putting on a show involving the US government.

Aeolun• 26 days ago

This should perhaps not be surprising considering the president.

outside12342• 26 days ago

Is there a list of the partners that get access? That should be public, right?

mikestorrent• 26 days ago

Bless your heart

paxys2• 26 days ago

TL;DR - OpenAI and Anthropic are both allowed to ship their most powerful models to a small number of companies pre-approved by Trump.

aryonoco• 26 days ago

Land of the free, land of the brave. Free market. Freedom of speech. Market economy.

These words don’t mean what they use to anymore. Newspeak is in full swing. Words still sound the same and are written in the same way but now mean something completely different. If Mao and Stalin were alive, they would be nodding approvingly.

wasting_time2• 26 days ago

Free for me, not for thee!

I hope the Chinese models catch up soon so I can stop contributing to the American economy.

1over137• 26 days ago

Stop contributing now. Why wait?

SwellJoe3• 26 days ago

"I have determined that appropriate safeguards are in place to permit certain trusted partners to access the Claude Mythos 5 Model"

I assume "trusted partners" means, "companies that have bribed Trump an appropriate amount". A few million for the inauguration, a few million for the ballroom, a few million on a movie about Melania, the don wants a taste.

andrewchambers• 26 days ago

This seems like it will have pretty huge negative affects on startups needing to compete with 'trusted partners'

A_D_E_P_T3• 26 days ago

Startups don't have as much money to spend on lobbying and gifts, though.

ares6232• 26 days ago

Will startups be even a thing now that the VCs obviously just need to funnel all their money to 2 or so companies ad-infinitum for guaranteed returns.

slashdave• 26 days ago

Well... there are crypto startups, and perhaps a generous definition of "money"

andy99• 26 days ago

Other than maybe some in-the-moment cybersec wrappers, is this really true? Does anyone think a startup with a good product is going to be materially disadvantaged by not having access to an incrementally better security focused LLM release? It’s lots of fun to pretend it’s some step-change that’s too dangerous for general release, but in real life it’s not conferring some massive advantage that any real startup would need to compete. Almost everyone would be best just to ignore it and keep building.

(Just to be clear, I think the gatekeeping is ridiculous, especially given the above)

xorgun• 26 days ago

Yes, i do. I have 10xd my productivity since last year and im not smarter. And yes my code is high quality

afavour• 26 days ago

That kind of gets to the absurdity of it. Either it’s a wildly powerful next generation model with incredible capabilities and thus needs to be limited… or it’s another progressive enhancement like we’ve seen already and limiting access to it makes no sense.

pdimitar5• 26 days ago

Does anyone think a startup with a good product is going to be materially disadvantaged by not having access to an incrementally better security focused LLM release?

- It's not "incrementally better". It's a complete game changer. Opus 4.8 on max thinking does X amount of mistakes in my commercial work. Fable 5 did 5% of X. Counted. I barely had anything to contribute in the work sessions, for a full week I could count on my two hands the total amount of times I actually caught Fable 5 -- and one part of those were not true mistakes, more like divergence from policy in our `CLAUDE.md` files.

- It's not "security focused". It's simply better in every way _plus_ it's also security-conscious.

- It legitimately accelerated my work. I don't have too much unknowns in my work, I simply have way too much to do. Fable 5 was an objective and measurable improvement over Opus 4.8. Returning to it after Fable 5 was removed was extremely discouraging and frustrating, and still is to some extent.

It’s lots of fun to pretend it’s some step-change that’s too dangerous for general release

Maybe, but not as much fun as tearing down a straw man apparently. :)

(Just to be clear, I think the gatekeeping is ridiculous, especially given the above)

It's ridiculous for multiple other reasons but ridiculous nonetheless.

Henchman21• 26 days ago

This is what “stacking the deck” looks like

kristopolous3• 26 days ago

Next time someone tells you this is the party of free market and small government, I guess you just laugh now?

GolfPopper3• 26 days ago

I've been laughing when people tell me that for my entire adult life. It remains a pretty funny bit of dark humor, though.

z3c0• 26 days ago

Growing up rural, the grift has been obvious my whole ĺife

az2262• 26 days ago

Not just that, Biden administration started with some AI regulation that the Trump administration nixed, and then outright banning models. Lunacy.

nutjob2• 26 days ago

Also free speech/the first amendment and various other rights people are supposed to have but don't in practice.

DANmode3• 26 days ago

Fourth Amendment, through corporate data purchase or exfiltration.

paytonjjones2• 26 days ago

That's always been a relative, rather than absolute statement.

Genuine question: if Democrats take power, do you expect them to be more interventionist or less interventionist with respect to AI? Bernie's jockeying leads me to suspect "more", but I could very well be wrong.

(FWIW I personally think modern AI falls in the small realm of potentially dangerous technologies that merit careful, ideally bipartisan, government oversight)

brokencode3• 26 days ago

I think they’d try to get something through Congress to regulate the industry in a rules-based way.

The current admin flies by the seat of their pants and at least creates the perception of political decision making.

4lx872• 26 days ago

We don’t have to guess. Democrats had a pragmatic policy under Biden — which was rescinded by Trump when he took office.

https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefing-room/statement...

kristopolous3• 26 days ago

Less. They'd use congress and the courts.

jknoepfler• 26 days ago

Ever since I've been conscious (the 80s), it's been the party of fear, violence and greed. They've consistently nominated actual clowns for positions of power. B-movie actor Ronald Reagan... Dan Quayle... Sarah Palin... the current, truly stunning iteration of absolute moral and intellectual bankruptcy TWICE after he killed hundreds of thousands of people due to COVID/vaccine skepticism and staged a violent attack on the capitol after losing a democratic election.

Free market? Small government? Big police state, trillions in defense contractor grift, unsustainable tax breaks to the wealthiest leading to massive spending deficits... all while doing everything to erode access to education, healthcare and basic services.

It is just utterly baffling to me. I'm... well along the spectrum... so people not responding correctly to obvious information is just something I've gotten used to but just... wow.

edit: typo

danans• 26 days ago

It is just utterly baffling to me. I'm... well along the spectrum... so people not responding correctly to obvious information is just something I've gotten used to but just... wow.

People get quite a kick out of seeing people they don't like get hurt. They can stay entertained by that for a long time until it bites them.

Only now is it finally biting with the collapse of the rural medical clinics, the war induced spike in the price of gasoline, etc.

That's probably playing a big part in the seeming shift in the electorate in every election.

MaxPock• 26 days ago

Republicans trust Americans with guns and not an LLM. That should tell you something.

Gagarin1917• 26 days ago

Now?

jmyeet2• 26 days ago

Considering there's no such thing as a "free market" I've been laughing for a real long time. Markets require regulation and enforcement to function.

The US government was created to protect the interests of rich, white, male slave owners. And if you look at Louisiana State Penintentiary (often called "Angola"), which is essentialy a Southern plantation with forced labor, you realize not as much has changed as you might otherwise think.

paulddraper3• 26 days ago

The it did a pretty shit job of it. Within 100 years it was killing hundreds of thousands to fight against that purpose.

paulddraper3• 26 days ago

Then cry as you look for the free market/small government leaders.

bilsbie• 26 days ago

Which party is?

iAMkenough2• 26 days ago

The one currently running the show.

seemaze• 26 days ago

Having an a collective economy governed by the “free market” is like having a pile of stones governed by gravity. There exists a primary directive force, but if you want to construct a cathedral or a bomb shelter, you need to impose some constraints, lest you revert to the angle of repose.

m4nu3l4• 26 days ago

This is a very bad analogy. Markets behave like an imperfect optimisation algorithm, and you can prove that, under some conditions which are most often met, they give people what they want. In fact, you can almost always expect governments to be less effective and less rational than markets in allocating resources to satisfy the desires of people, even when democratic. You can prove it either by using the same logic that tells you when markets fail (externalities, information asymmetry), or empirically by looking at what was basically the most perfect A/B test we had on society over the 20th century. Although it was a comparison between mixed economies and fully centralised ones, there is no reason to expect the optimum mix of centralisation/distribution to be closer to the worst-performing one (the fully centralised one).

digitaltrees18• 26 days ago

Yes. But that was the “big government democrat” argument that republicans said was evil and un American.

JPKab2• 26 days ago

If you think that anthropic wasn't pushing aggressive regulatory capture legislation in the Biden administration, why do you think they hired a bunch of people from it?

Alupis6• 26 days ago

It's very fashionable to hate on the current administration, despite what the previous administration was doing. That's reality and I'll be punished to hell for saying so.

ribosometronome• 26 days ago

What Anthropic was pushing for under Biden has very little to do with the values Republicans have been espousing (and failing to live up to) for decades. That's kind of the point op was making. Republicans run on small government but do not deliver it. Democrats do not run on small government. Democrat Presidents campaign on and push for things like the ACA, they don't have fun quips like, “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the Government, and I'm here to help.”

A clear regulatory framework to operate within allows businesses to operate within it rather than get surprised by the King's whims upending their business on every few Fridays. If you expect regulation will eventually happen, pushing for it to happen on terms you're able to comply with rather than as haphazard surprises is pretty sensible.

ch4s34• 26 days ago

They haven’t claimed to be the free market party since Obama was in office. Trump very much ran an anti free market campaign the first time.

digitaltrees18• 26 days ago

Yes they have.

y1n0• 26 days ago

Well, there are the political ideals expressed or embraced by the populace, and then there are politicians. AFAICT political parties at the national level and state level in the US is pure theater.

rikfckfj284• 26 days ago

the question isn’t about size, it’s about who the government works for. Small government can promote private interests by not entering certain societal spaces, leaving them for profit making — education, healthcare, housing etc. But large government can also promote private interests, by directing tax dollars to corporations (and still not entering certain societal spaces).

It’s not about size, it’s about where it chooses to operate

jandrewrogers9• 26 days ago

The authority under which this was done has been operative and actively used for several decades. It isn't a partisan issue, it is a policy of American governance. Anyone that has worked on frontier "dual use" technologies will be familiar with the legal regime.

The only thing that changed is people are writing articles about it in the news media.

typeofhuman• 26 days ago

The only correct reply.

sagarm• 26 days ago

Jumping in to reflexively defend the admin again, I see.

Is there any policy from this admin you don't support?

digitaltrees18• 26 days ago

But it was applied using principles of the rule of law with clear regulatory frameworks. This is not that

davesque• 26 days ago

Also known as, the tu quoque fallacy. Just because politicians in both parties have been doing this for decades doesn't mean that this administration is not especially hypocritical for doing it after whinging so much about free speech and free markets.

digitaltrees18• 26 days ago

If you laugh you’re a communist and against Christianity and part of a satanic cabal.

kristopolous3• 25 days ago

these days my actual policy is to find whoever is being slandered as a communist and vote for them.

sharts• 26 days ago

Free for me, not for thee

jimmydoe2• 26 days ago

Congrats sama. Such a great sophisticated 5d chess move.

llelouch2• 26 days ago

Please explain. Do you think Altman wanted this to catch-up?

jimmydoe2• 26 days ago

I think it’s a complex dynamic but he certainly preferred this to happen than not, and someone might have nudged the development to his favor while aligned well with this admin’s interests.

cute_boi2• 26 days ago

I think we should also thank Dario for constantly beaming "Mythos is dangerous". That's why I keep saying we shouldn't support Closed AI and Misanthropic.

mlinsey3• 26 days ago

I understand why Anthropic might not want to fight this particular one in court, because they're trying to convince the administration to let them move forward.

But would another company who is not on the trusted partner list and has less to lose taking on the admin have standing to sue here? On the basis of the export control being illegal and this putting their business at a disadvantage vs. competitors with access

intrasight• 26 days ago

They could just ignore Trump as he has no authority to so limit a private company.

mlinsey3• 26 days ago

The labs will not just ignore the order, there are too many other levers they can try to pull to mess with those companies. Just for some examples, think about the number of employees reliant on visas that could be revoked, the government contracts that the hyperscalers hosting them that could be canceled, the certifications that all the data centers need to be hooked up to the grid, the tariffs that could be put on critical components, the IPOs that need to be approved by regulators, the bill introduced in Congress to seize 50% of their equity...

Lots of these moves would and should be struck down in court as an arbitrary and capricious use of administrative power. Some of them might not be, and in the meantime you're signing up for tons of trouble. A trillion-dollar company does not simply go to war with the US government.

A more mid-sized company that's not so intertwined, but not so small that they can't get a good legal team, might be another story.

jvanderbot• 26 days ago

Aside from how brazen and stupid this would be, the executive branch does have ways of limiting them and their sharing of tech, as we've seen.

ericmay• 26 days ago

Yes he does. They could ignore the US government, but will likely quickly find themselves in court fighting a fight that they are likely to lose and isn’t worth fighting anyway.

jandrewrogers9• 26 days ago

These regulations have been in place since the 1990s and have been applied by every administration. It isn’t a new authority and many companies have had the opportunity to fight it. Anthropic’s lawyers will know this.

naturalmovement5• 26 days ago

Ignoring US export control laws that have been on the books for nearly 50 years is a good way to pay millions of $ in fines and/or land in pound-me-in-the-ass prison.

Ask every satellite launch company in the 90s how that worked out.

matheusmoreira3• 26 days ago

They'd need to build an army of automated AI killbots that could rival the entire US military before they could even begin to think of defying Trump.

rdtsc2• 26 days ago

They could just ignore Trump as he has no authority to so limit a private company.

Ignore export control regulations?

I think you’re trying to say you really feel it’s not fair, and you’d like so and so meany and bully to go and pound sand. And yeah most people feel the same way here but ignoring export control regulations is not a joking matter and not something to play around with. Especially for a company that feels they are having extra eyes on them.

KingMob2• 26 days ago

If you have power and are willing to use it, you don't need legal authority, it turns out.

Trump does many things he lacks the legal authority to do.

threethirtytwo• 26 days ago

Also there’s no incentive to fight. They already have one of the best models. Mythos remains a trump card when a competitor releases an even better model.

bluegatty6• 26 days ago

There's huge incentive.

The government has arbitrary commandeered their business.

This could ruin Anthropic.

They are walking a tight rope with respect to revenues, hype, IPO.

If this kills their hyper growth prospects, it could kill the IPO.

If there's a serious change the gov. is out of line, the judges could put a stay and possibly throw this out.

There may however be enough of a case, in which there's maybe not much they can do.

Having a crazy person completely control your business is very, very bad.

siva7• 26 days ago

sue? whom? usa? have fun..

reasonableklout• 26 days ago

A law firm already has: https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/legal-tech-firm-sue...

seizethecheese• 26 days ago

US government regularly loses lawsuits and has to backtrack policy.

naturalmovement5• 26 days ago

Export control is not illegal where are you coming up with this stuff?

Claiming ignorance is a good way to pay tens of millions of $ in fines or do prison time.

Here's one from TWO DAYS AGO:

https://www.justice.gov/usao-edny/pr/manager-us-freight-forw...

She will be doing 18 months in federal lockup.

The people in charge of enforcing US export law are worse than city building inspectors and the penalties are orders of magnitude more severe. They're not people you want to mess with, ignore, or pretend you didn't know the rules.

sethammons• 26 days ago

As described in court filings, from at least December 2022 through December 2024, Mazulina conspired with Russian freight forwarding companies and others to unlawfully ship controlled items, including industrial oil and gas equipment, from the United States to Russia, through intermediary countries. At one point, in June 2023, Mazulina told colleagues that her clients were paying through bank accounts in third party countries because “[m]ost of [her] clients [were] currently sanctioned with USA.” Mazulina attempted to conceal the unlawful scheme by submitting and causing the submission of false export documents to the U.S. government, which omitted the information that the goods were destined for Russia.

That feels materially different than a software program released in the open domestic market.

And while it feels different, the government would apparently disagree: https://exportcontrol.lbl.gov/training/export-control-overvi...

Distribution of software to a foreign national within the US is an explicit proviso of the law. That is a wild law and I am surprised it stands.

itopaloglu838• 25 days ago

I think it’s a general misconception with folks that export controls only apply to weapons, forgetting that it applies to many high-end manufacturing and technology.

I’m surprised about some of the reactions, but again anyone who has a security clearance wouldn’t touch any of this discussion with a ten-foot pole also.

mlinsey3• 24 days ago

I'm not sure where in my post you thought I was suggesting either ignoring an export control or that all export controls are illegal.

Export controls are governed by the Export Control Reform Act of 2018. The procedures the government must follow to enact a rule is defined by the Administrative Procedures Act. It's not a slam-dunk case, but I think there are significant questions around the arbitrary nature of the approved company list, the control restricting US-based permanent resident employees from accessing models, and how the rule was enacted in general which would make a viable case.

Suing the government saying that APA was not correctly followed or that the export control in question does not comply with the ECRA will absolutely not get you put in prison, that's not the kind of country we live in and honestly I have no clue what you're talking about.

zarzavat4• 26 days ago

Technically the US government is allowing Anthropic to serve the models to any US citizen, and it's Anthropic who decided that's impossible to comply with and so they pulled the model for everyone. I guess a US business with non-citizen employees could work.

A lawsuit would be a hard sell though, because Anthropic themselves argued that the technology is dangerous. Even if many people on HN might think that Anthropic was scaremongering about Mythos, a court is probably going to take their assessment at face value, and courts are loathe to find against governments in cases of national security.

There's also the issue that these models are getting better through an iterative process, so even if the line between GPT 5.5 and Fable/GPT 5.6 is somewhat arbitrary, it doesn't mean that the government shouldn't be able to draw a line at all. So you're left arguing that they drew the line too early, which is subjective.

wahnfrieden2• 26 days ago

Are you certain? Trump admin is hand-picking GPT 5.6 winners

naturalmovement5• 26 days ago

I guess a US business with non-citizen employees could work.

No. Only if those employees have a green card and the company must not only take on that responsibility but ensure other employees are denied access. Otherwise the company would be subject to millions in fines.

US export laws are no fuckin' joke like everyone here seems to think they are.

It's really frustrating to read pages of comments rooted in emotion and no understanding of the existing laws.

IshKebab• 26 days ago

Anthropic themselves argued that the technology is dangerous

They said Mythos was dangerous, not Fable which is what got banned.

re-thc4• 26 days ago

Technically the US government is allowing Anthropic to serve the models to any US citizen, and it's Anthropic who decided that's impossible to comply with

It is technically impossible. Many of the researchers working on the models aren't US citizens. That's not just within Anthropic. It'd make things 100% worse.

llelouch2• 25 days ago

Anthropic themselves argued that the technology is dangerous.

They never released mythos 5 to the general public. And they never will.

olalonde3• 26 days ago

It feels the U.S. is moving closer to a textbook definition of crony capitalism. Really sad but unsurprising with the current administration.

mullingitover2• 26 days ago

I don't think you can move closer to something that you're already fully enmeshed in.

The rate that the ruling class ran into crony capitalism at the first chance they got is something that needs to be remembered. They'll try to act like they were always against it at some point in the near future.

olalonde3• 26 days ago

Milton Friedman was prescient on this:

The two biggest enemies of the free market are two separate groups: my academic colleagues and business people. Business people are enemies of free markets, not friends.
[...]
The business people are just the opposite. They're all in favor of freedom for everybody else, and at the drop of a hat you can get any leading businessman to give you an eloquent speech on the virtues of a free market. But when it comes to their own business, they want to go down to Washington and get a special tariff to protect their business. They want a special tax deduction. They want a tax subsidy. And Chrysler is on the verge of failing, which it should have done. It should have been allowed to fail. Chrysler goes down and exercises political influence and tries to get the government to lend it money to subsidize it.
So businessmen in general — not all, there have been some notable exceptions — and I don't want to include everybody. But in the main, most businessmen are enemies of free markets.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhgaPVO8aw8

alanwreath• 26 days ago

I’m not sure what the US government is trying to do. At first it seems like they are just trying to stifle some company that said no. Now they are just doing free publicity. It’s like never before have I wanted to try something out as much as this.

They’re in effect saying “nothing else is as powerful as what Anthropic put out”. Even though that might not really be the case it’s what it sounds like.

drcode• 26 days ago

they're flailing is what they're doing

conception• 26 days ago

They are collecting tribute is what they are doing.

SpicyLemonZest5• 26 days ago

Is there any evidence at all that would convince you that they're trying to mitigate real risks that actually exist?

JackC• 26 days ago

I mean, we're talking about an administration that has already over-reached in regulating this specific company out of personal bias; is openly seeking leverage over companies for favoritism and graft; hires on the basis of loyalty to whims of a narcissist; makes fun of the whole idea of competent government based on expertise; provides a range of conflicting explanations for whatever it chooses to do; and has been unable to field a team capable of understanding or explaining whatever real risks are here.

Your question is like asking what evidence would convince us that a bag of rocks doesn't have rocks in it. Easy, just take the rocks out.

Avicebron• 26 days ago

What real risks? Genuinely.

I've read all the sci fi they have. It's not hard to see where the ideas came from.

What's being questioned is this sentiment of "The only way to save humanity is for me and my lighthaven groupies to become Xillionaire god-kings"

nozzlegear4• 26 days ago

Is there any evidence at all that would convince you they're just blowing smoke up our asses in pursuit of money?

digitaltrees18• 26 days ago

Yes.

A published policy with the right to appeal exclusions from the list.

An equal standard for all companies rather than ad hoc application.

A countervailing policy to mitigate the unfair advantage conferred on the companies that have early access (such as a higher tax rate that goes to fund ai job loses, and a commitment that AI use of the new models won’t result in layoffs).

A requirement that hardware is made available for open source models rather than locked up in by the AI labs.

A restriction on AI labs being vertically integrated from hardware all the way up through the app layer. I would restrict AI labs to being API providers and prohibit them from building apps. That would allow an ecosystem of independent software development on the app layer without fear of being copied by the labs that have an unfair advantage in seeing the data while apps are being built, the usage data as they become successful and the ability to undercut competitors by subsidizing tokens unfairly.

I could go on.

teliosix• 26 days ago

Of course not. I like to complain that AI is dangerous and should be regulated and then out of the other side of my mouth complain that it is unfair and a gimmick if the government tries to regulate anything.

Why? Because I am a social media addict that lives in 2026 and I don't know how to relate to things in the world that don't involve complaining.

Complaining you see is more form of epistemology and entertainment at the same time to me. Reasoned debate and nuance just doesn't get enough likes for me. I am all about the emotional response to a topic.

c2h5oh• 26 days ago

Cynic in me thinks it's some or all of the following:

- extract monetary contributions for their side of political spectrum from ai companies

- extract money for personal gain

- grokify ai answers on political / worldview topics, because polls are showing people trust ai answers more than wikipedia

lawn• 26 days ago

Grift. It's all about the grift.

deaux2• 26 days ago

Could you share some pictures of the rock you're living under? The US regime is concerned with furthering the interests of a closed circle of powerful loyals. This achieves that goal. Access is reserved to those loyals.

ryandrake• 26 days ago

It’s probably just basic corruption. Want access to Mythos for your company? Enrich someone in the administration. That’s how everything works now: they outlaw/tariff it and then you pay a bribe to get it back or get declared exempt.

ASinclair• 25 days ago

It just came out the Kalshi outright gave Donald Trump Jr a $300k stake in the company when it made him a “strategic advisor”. That’s the name of the game now

kdawag• 26 days ago

To the surprise of absolutely nobody following the news

standardUser2• 26 days ago

Meanwhile, China is pushing the World Artificial Intelligence Cooperation Organization (WAICO), which, in the face of internal divisions and impotent leadership among Western nations, could prove to be the first global regime that China gets to build and lead.

Havoc2• 26 days ago

One more aspect where the US can no longer be counted on.

Let's hope this creates a bit more fire under the asses of other countries

avaer• 26 days ago

I wonder if the Founding Fathers knew about AI, they would include it in the 2nd?

The spirit is to provide effective tools for the people to resist federal military tyranny, and Mythos seems like it would be a good tool to defend against that, for so many reasons.

tyre4• 26 days ago

Could you explain this like I'm 35?

aesthesia2• 26 days ago

I'm not sure that analogy works: pretty much everyone agrees that there are some types of weapons civilians shouldn't be able to have, even though they might be very effective for resisting military tyranny.

digitaltrees18• 26 days ago

I don’t think everyone agrees on that. It’s just that the government has been able to legislate that as technology evolved.

That being said many legal scholars say the state militia was intended to be the defense against tyranny not individual citizens because there were government led crackdowns on rebellion under Washington and other presidents from the earliest days of the republic. State militias have the full range of weapons

TheDong• 26 days ago

As Iran is showing, the federal government is worried about nukes. I feel like a modern 2nd amendment should ensure every US citizen has a right to up to three (3) nuclear weapons.

truthbe2• 26 days ago

Open source should create a new license where it specifically doesn't allow release to these "trusted partners".

digitaltrees18• 26 days ago

And blocks not just training on the oss code but use of it by models. If they want to build on the shoulders of us plebes they shouldn’t be able to include our code in their vibe coded bs

Alien1Being• 26 days ago

Don't start to rely on it .

The US might remove access next month in a fit of pique.

The Chinese models look increasingly more reliable and safer.

DANmode3• 26 days ago

Safer?

micromacrofoot3• 26 days ago

well at least they're a little further away

hajile• 26 days ago

If I can run it locally, it is certainly more safe than running on some cloud server somewhere.

tyre4• 26 days ago

This is a pithy internet comment, but terrible advice.

Between the Chinese government and Anthropic, I know which one I'd rather send tokens to. For all of the problems of the US, for-profit corporations, data harvesting, etc. the CCP (and, perhaps more troublesome, its allies) is far less likely to align with your interests.

plandis• 26 days ago

I know which one I'd rather send tokens to.

Do you have access to Mythos? If not the choice has already been made for you.

jeroenhd• 26 days ago

I don't buy that anymore. The day America threatened to invade Canada and Denmark was the day America showed they cannot be trusted any more.

It's not like China can be trusted either, but China isn't planning any direct invasions to the west. Taiwan, perhaps, but they're playing a long-term tactical game rather than a "invade the country we don't like this week" game. They might get some info on you, but the data brokers in the west will sell a lot more details about you, pre-categorized and all.

If you're afraid of industrial espionage, Chinese companies may be a risk, but in that case you shouldn't be uploading your secrets to an AI company in the first place.

nickthegreek• 26 days ago

You don’t have to run the chinese models in chinese data centers as many of them are open weights. Some could say that trumps both.

rcr-anti• 26 days ago

Being open weight, the Chinese models can be served the same way as Anthropic's: via AWS or GCP. Or whomever really, or on prem.

ls612• 26 days ago

You don't have to send your tokens to the CCP to use the Chinese models, that is the beauty of it. You can find GLM, Minimax, Deepseek, Kimi, etc hosted in China, Europe, the US, and probably elsewhere depending on what your geographic preferences for token transport are.

foogazi2• 26 days ago

What if the model is hosted on a 3rd party site ?

greenavocado2• 26 days ago

China won't arrest you for wrongthink where you live now

ebbi• 26 days ago

Given recent history, I'd be more likely to be killed by American actions than Chinese ones.

wyrdcurt3• 26 days ago

Less likely to align with your interests maybe, but have you considered that not everyone has the same interests?

Personally I am much more concerned about handing my data over to the government that actually has power over me and labels dissenters terrorists than I am with the government overseas that has no direct effect on my life... well, other than providing alternative LLMs with permissive licenses that can be hosted anywhere in the world... but to each their own, I suppose.

digitaltrees18• 26 days ago

Except the open weights can live on your hardware so no one gets your tokens.

deaux2• 26 days ago

Between the Chinese government and Anthropic, I know which one I'd rather send tokens to.

You meant to write "Between the Chinese government and the US government". Completely agreed though, better to send it to the former.

thewebguyd• 26 days ago

I know which one I'd rather send tokens to

That's the neat part with the Chinese open weight models. You don't have to send your tokens to the PRC, the models can be hosted stateside or anywhere else you'd like.

woctordho• 26 days ago

Don't trust US or China. Trust the open source community.

surgical_fire5• 26 days ago

I find interesting that the tactics to nudge people towards US models and away from Chinese models ceased to be on merit or technical capability - anyone that used DeepSeek or MiMo knows that those are nothing short of excellent. Now it's the old-fashioned fearmongering.

You know what? I live in Europe. China was not the country threatening military action against one EU nation that would throw the whole continent into war a few months ago.

Also, it's not Chinese companies harvesting every piece of data about me that they can get their hands on.

If fear is your argument, I know that I fear the US and its big tech corporations a lot more that China.

matheusmoreira3• 26 days ago

As if we have a choice. I'm one of the foreign peasants the US government has cut off from the top tier models. I'll probably switch to GLM 5.2 when my current Anthropic subscription ends.

expedition323• 26 days ago

Not worshipping Jesus and his earthly apostle Trump is in my country's interest though.

hmokiguess• 26 days ago

I identify as a trusted partner, can I have one Mythos please.

andai• 26 days ago

Weren't they already doing that?

bastard_op• 26 days ago

China will just buy a "trusted partner" one way or another.

It's like the epidemic of scam nvidia cards being resold without gpu or memory - where do you think those are going?

theturtletalks• 26 days ago

> More than 100 companies and institutions will now have access to Mythos 5, including many Fortune 500 companies, a source familiar with the new directive said, declining to be identified due to the sensitivity of the matter.

Who are those 100 companies? Clearly they can't compete on merit and have rubbed some hands to be picked as winners...at least for now.

itopaloglu838• 26 days ago

I don’t know if this has something to do with the administration or access to export controlled technology. There could be a licensing process, but I don’t think it would be public information, we don’t know whom each defense contractor sells to as public.

fma• 25 days ago

May have an overlap of which political campaign they donate too.

micromacrofoot3• 26 days ago

america is worrying about a civil war and missing the corporate takeover

chungus_amongus• 26 days ago

despicable

bluecalm2• 26 days ago

Is there any scenario where it's not catastrophic for for the frontier labs?

They just got their market cut to a fraction. Investing in new tech is now very risky because even if things work out you might not be able to sell anything.

There were already serious doubts about ROI for the frontier labs. If they can only sell to 100 or so entities it's over business wise.

What's the endgame here?

dansquizsoft3• 26 days ago

It's bad, very bad, for the frontier labs.

exabrial• 26 days ago

How does my small company become a "trusted partner"?

willsmith72• 26 days ago

Oh you thought this was a competitive free market?

t0mas884• 26 days ago

I thought "Free market!!1!" was basic US policy. But apparently you can't do any consumer protection laws, but you can regulate AI access to only your wealthy friends / campaign sponsors.

goatlover• 26 days ago

This administration doesn't care about small companies anymore than it cares about regular Americans.

Dig1t• 26 days ago

Anthropic has been touting how their newest model is basically a cyber weapon and is so dangerous that they need to only role it out to trusted people and make sure it has super restrictive guard rails. They are begging to be regulated. This is exactly what they’ve been asking for.

flipbrad• 26 days ago

Donate to his ballroom project, perhaps? Pay for tokens with his crypto coin?

apexalpha• 26 days ago

Donate money to your President, probably.

phaser• 26 days ago

Easy, pivot to the military industrial complex, dummy!

tonyrice• 26 days ago

I'm looking forward to better open source models. Now I just need to afford the compute to run these models.

randomNumber7• 26 days ago

Most people can't afford 6 digits for hardware that deprecates in a couple of years.

chopete3• 26 days ago

It is interesting that there is no public announcement from the US government or Anthropic on this topic. That means there is no form to apply to be a trusted partner.

Does it mean US is allowing accessing to governments' exclusive list?

wewewedxfgdf• 26 days ago

I wonder if Anthropic and ChatGPT will continue to scream at the top of their lungs how dangerous their services are and how they will break the security of everything everywhere?

Or may they'll decide to be a little more quiet and less end-of-the-world-is-nigh-if-you-use-our-services?

zacksiri2• 26 days ago

This reminds me of the following quote

"When you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing - When you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors - When you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don’t protect you against them, but protect them against you - When you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice - You may know that your society is doomed." ― Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged

SwellJoe3• 26 days ago

I'll point out that a lot of the current administration and Republican Congress that enables the current administration are Ayn Rand fans.

zacksiri2• 26 days ago

They cherry pick and choose the parts of her work that fits their agenda, while forgetting the other parts.

layla5alive• 26 days ago

The Cantillon Effect applied to machine intelligence..

jandrewrogers9• 26 days ago

+1 Insightful

Bluestein• 25 days ago

Indeed. Very much so. It puts a name to something that is happening.-

monksy• 26 days ago

I can't wait till employees start helping with the distillation process.

jchook2• 26 days ago

The entire arc reads as a marketing stunt rather than a legitimate national security threat. Maybe Anthropic asked the US for this action to be taken.

edit: > Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick (lol)

Fable was out for 3 days, not really long enough for us to properly evaluate it, but the "Sorry we had to remove Fable. Read more. (because it's too powerful btw)" is loudly shown every chance they get for weeks. It creates a halo.

Reminiscent of the 1999 Apple G4 commercial where they displayed it next to military tanks. "For the first time in history, a personal computer has been classified as a weapon by the U.S. government."

espeed• 26 days ago

Are Cyber Verification Program (CVP) members included in this?: "We also intend to scale up our Cyber Verification Program, which would grant Mythos-class capabilities to many more organizations for specific cyberdefense tasks" (https://www.anthropic.com/news/expanding-project-glasswing).

Cryptosale75• 26 days ago

I personally believe that Dario Amodei is probably one of the 'less shitty' AI leaders. But literally no one is going to convince me that either 1. He overplayed his hand and fucked up 2. This is at least 'majority' PR.

brokensegue• 26 days ago

You mean neither?

jraph• 26 days ago

Did you mess up your double negation?

theahura2• 26 days ago

usgov picking winners and losers in AI --> usgov picking winners and losers in every industry (speedrun, any %)

theahura2• 26 days ago

“I have determined that appropriate safeguards are in place to permit certain trusted partners to access the Claude Mythos 5 Model,” Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick wrote to Anthropic’s chief compute officer Tom Brown Friday

why is the commerce secretary making this decision

naturalmovement5• 26 days ago

[flagged]

kurthr• 26 days ago

So no need to do any deep consideration or evaluation, just the approval of the Epstein class.

jchook2• 26 days ago

And it's Howard Lutnick... the guy who lived next door to Epstein and magically wasn't at work on 9/11.

nazgob• 26 days ago

Does it apply to USA citizens and organizations as well?

ed_elliott_asc2• 26 days ago

My tin foil hat version of myself says it is because the whole thing is a marketing stunt and certain members of the administration are getting kick backs for it.

0000000000100• 26 days ago

Marketing stunt by who dude? Do you really think Anthropic would really go this far? This whole situation is completely absurd. The federal government is arbitrarily restricting AI models without really providing any reasoning. This is not a clear and transparent government and it just feels like gears are moving behind the scenes that have lead this out of character restriction of private and extremely wealthy (at least on paper) companies without much media or presence of any kind from the fed's side.

linohh• 26 days ago

corruption

jurschreuder• 26 days ago

It's a win-win game because both Anthropic and the Government are on the front page again pulling on important leavers.

In the mass-marketing world it's less about who's right or wrong but who is perceived by the population to be pulling the leavers on the front page again.

gizzlon• 26 days ago

I think this could crash the stock market: Their TAM is now a small percentage of what it was, with all the second and third otder effects that follow from that

xyst• 26 days ago

"trusted" meaning "paid millions to trump admin slush fund account"

bel8• 26 days ago

This makes me sad since it implies that the best LLM I will ever be allowed to use is GPT 5.5 and Opus 4.8. Anything smarter than that is deemed too risky.

So much wasted potential.

And why would I pay Anthropic or OpenAI once consumer hardware gets powerful enough to run an open weight Chinese version of Opus 4.8? Even more so when mobile phones are able to run similar LLMs.

Their financial growth looks doomed. It looks like they will be heavily regulated just like the next missile factory. This is antagonist to VC led turbo growth startup regime.

johnisgood4• 26 days ago

Cannot you just obtain them the same way you would obtain any copyrighted material and use them locally?

timurlenk• 26 days ago

Well, now I'm rooting for the Europeans/chinese to develop something better and release it.

One can hope.

andxor• 26 days ago

That's not what is implied. Fable may still be widely available.

cubefox• 26 days ago

... in the US.

sschueller3• 26 days ago

The LLM improvement curve will level off and with so many AI engineering being in China they will catch up quickly.

The financial growth based on that everyone on earth will need to have an OpenAI or Anthropic subscription is quickly falling apart.

DeepSeek V4 is good enough for most of my work that that I can no longer justify paying 100x for something else. The cost difference is astronomical.

varjag2• 26 days ago

Not sure why people here are so upbeat about China. It is almost guaranteed it will also introduce export controls on the models.

HexPhantom5• 26 days ago

Where the frontier labs still have a business is probably not casual consumer chat

ifwinterco2• 26 days ago

The last bit might be the point - this has all got a bit out of hand, the US government might have decided now is the time to prick this bubble.

Either because ordinary people hate it or (more likely) because Sam and Dario have got too powerful and they’re now starting to become a genuine rival castle to the US government in elite theory terms - of course at that point you get your wings clipped

Hamuko• 26 days ago

I have very little confidence in the current US administration trying to protect the economy. If anything they'd just try to cash out.

HexPhantom5• 26 days ago

I share the sadness, but I'm not sure the consumer market was ever the main prize here

cmrdporcupine• 25 days ago

Right, I cancelled my Codex sub yesterday, it ends today. I'm not American and I see the writing on the wall, I'd just as soon improve my tooling to work more effectively with "stupider" open weight models than be dependent on Lutnick and Bessent for "permission" to use the frontier models.

Sad situation is that half the talent that did the primary research and initially created these models and got them out there was educated here or taught here or have citizenship here in Canada. Karpathy, Sutskever, Hinton, there's a huge list. And for other countries, too.

In the short term this play may work for the US administration, in the long run it will only reduce the flow of talent and good will and sharing between G7 nations.

chvid• 26 days ago

It never made same sense that the most capable model was used by the CIA to create vault 7-like exploits while the same model was being used by another government project / random little people to patch up the vulnerabilities the exploits relied on.

ksimukka2• 26 days ago

ok, who in the EU is working on our own frontier model? surely we have the drive and ability?

alecco• 26 days ago

EU just shrunk their AI projects and picked a very, very dodgy Italian company who has been burning money with nothing to show.

pembrook• 26 days ago

EU has the talent but not the ability due to structural issues and fragmentation.

And even if they solved that (it will take them 40 years of bickering), it’s not something you can top-down create, unless you want the AI equivalent of the Yugo.

China has the drive and the ability. It’s communist in name only, and has truly turned into a hyper-capitalist super producer (less government spending as % of GDP than even the US).

It will beat out both the EU and US and sweep both the digital economy (the US’s golden goose) and industrial economy (the EU’s golden goose) over the next 20 years.

ksimukka2• 23 days ago

are you located in that region?

dansquizsoft3• 26 days ago

The EU is dead in the water on this front mate...

zsoltkacsandi• 26 days ago

And this is how Chinese AI companies will win over the U.S.

Play stupid games win stupid prizes.

HexPhantom5• 26 days ago

Hard to see how this does not turn into export controls for models, just with a lot more ambiguity

OtherShrezzing• 26 days ago

What’ll happen when Google Deep Mind go to release their next models, developed mostly in London?

Are Google going to end up in a situation where the people working on their models cannot use the models after launch?

t0mas884• 26 days ago

These are export restrictions, so if the model is in London (how do you determine that? The weights? The training itself?) there is no need to export it from the US. Then Google may have found gold. They can sell it to everyone that can't get the best OpenAI or Anthropic models.

spacebanana7• 26 days ago

Usually export controls are applied to stuff where some significant % is made in America so a few US based engineers could make the project export controllable.

ben_w5• 26 days ago

What’ll happen when Google Deep Mind go to release their next models, developed mostly in London?

I am a British citizen living in Berlin, and even when making apps purely for the German market I still have to go through US export restrictions: https://developer.apple.com/help/app-store-connect/manage-ap...

I'd assume that Deep Mind, being owned by a US company and having US offices, has to care about US law, despite the differences (me: small fry; them: actually having offices there), because the chain of enforcement is still "take it or leave it" at each stage (USG->Google->DeepMind vs USG->Apple->3rd party Apple devs).

TiredOfLife• 26 days ago

Restrictions are on good models. You might as well ask what would happen when Microsoft open sources Office

SkitterKherpi• 26 days ago

Gemni is really not that far behind, 3.1Pro was the best model or close to it when it came out, 3.5Pro likely wont be but whenever they get to 4 that could easily be Fable level, just later than when Fable itself came out.

dgellow11• 26 days ago

It’s whatever the Trump admin decides. There are no rules here, we are past that

re-thc4• 26 days ago

What’ll happen when Google Deep Mind go to release their next models, developed mostly in London?

Unless you open source it then Google Deep Mind isn't the entity "releasing" it. It's some other Google that's US based, e.g. Google Cloud running the APIs etc.

User -> Google -> Google Deep Mind.

So nope, same restrictions apply.

__alexs3• 26 days ago

I don't understand how this doesn't entirely screw the TAM for these companies?

As an EU company I think I now basically have to consider US AI as hostile and avoid it.

vld_chk• 26 days ago

now

Unfortunately, Europe should had made this conclusion at least 18 months ago, not now.

Watch out European politics procrastinate for at least one more year hoping that Trump will reverse. Then procrastinate more, because “elections soon, maybe Dems will win and reverse”.

I live in Europe and will never go to work in the US; but EU/UK inability to solve national security problems is beyond pathetic.

__alexs3• 26 days ago

Oh sure the EU is terrible at all technology policy but it also seems like this is sort of a don't interrupt your enemy when they are making as mistake situation.

If the US commit to handicapping their AI industry like this it's going to destroy the competitiveness of those companies globally. All of those US spending commitments on data centres etc are going to collapse, or americans will need to pay 2x the token cost of the rest of the world. Both very bad options.

subscribed• 26 days ago

AFAIR there was the evidence posted for the specific three letter creeps snooping specifically on Airbus and sending everything to Boeing, long time ago, when "Echelon" was considered a tinfoil hat conspiracy.

bvcp• 26 days ago

Watch the eu do the same thing

dgellow11• 26 days ago

By doing it, as leader in the industry, the world hegemon, and self-titled „leader of the free world“, the US gave the implicit permission for any other country to do the same

__alexs3• 25 days ago

If the EU develops a market leading model to even control in the first place I think that would at least be a neutrally good outcome.

dgellow11• 26 days ago

As an EU company I think I now basically have to consider US AI as hostile and avoid it

Yes, that’s the only sane conclusion. And yes it does screw the TAM, but it’s not like the AI vendors had actual realistic economic plans to begin with

jimnotgym• 26 days ago

This will be more validation that the rest of the world needs to be very wary of US technology.

OkWing99• 26 days ago

So what happens to their $1T valuations now, given they can't sell the product to consumers, and open-weight models are closing in on competition?

DrProtic• 26 days ago

I have a feeling that’s the same question Whitehouse asked Anthropic and OpenAI.

dgellow11• 26 days ago

Ask SpaceX. There is no rational for those valuations, it’s pure FOMO

cogman10• 25 days ago

Yeah, it seems like this makes a massive cut into their possible revenue.

goldenarm3• 26 days ago

Is there a world where frontier labs move to somewhere else like London to escape the business hurdles of the US? There are trillions at stake, is it a plausible scenario?

merek• 26 days ago

Why London of all places?

cherryteastain• 26 days ago

It's the place outside US and China with the greatest concentration of AI talent. Deepmind was founded in London for instance.

Sadly UK is fully into nanny state "safetyism" culture so I am not convinced it'd be better.

goldenarm3• 26 days ago

Talent concentration, little tech regulation, English speaking, decent funding, close to GMT. There's a reason why a big chunk Google deepmind is already there.

ascorbic3• 25 days ago

Deepmind is based there. Anthropic's biggest research base outside the US is there. OpenAI has just announced a big new office there.

theplumber4• 26 days ago

London sucks, not to mention the UK’s political future seems even more nationalistic than MAGA

eamag• 26 days ago

They already have offices in London and Zurich, but it doesn't let them to escape anything

goldenarm3• 26 days ago

I know, but what about leaving the US entirely to escape the export bans ? Like ByteDance and Shein left China for Singapore.

ben_w5• 26 days ago

A world, yes. Plausible, no.

The US is already seeing energy market distortions from the power use of AI; the UK has a much smaller total electricity supply, both from a lower population and the baseline per person being lower.

Total UK demand in 2023 was 316.8 TWh[0], or an average of about 36 GW. The US currently has 33 GW of data centres, and the AI boom plan, so far as discern actual plans from AI hallucinations in the modern web, is about ten times that.

From the scales people talk about, my expectation is that even the smaller additional supply needed for the constant churn of newly trained frontier models would probably exceed what London alone can manage.

[0] generation less than that, it has imports; chapter 5: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/66a7e14da3c2a...

[1] https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=316.8+TWh+%2F+year

niraj898• 26 days ago

The funny thing is, they are planning to just use it for US government and not allow public to use fable 5 atleast..

baq2• 26 days ago

I’m on record saying mistral needs 50B euros asap; I’ll admit this was wrong, they need more sooner

re-thc4• 26 days ago

Doesn’t help unless they get GPUs or equivalent to train.

notrealyme123• 26 days ago

With enough money this problem is solvable. GPUs alone are only a fraction of a frontier model.

klohto• 26 days ago

To do what exactly? They have been nothing but EU funds leech and corporiders.

Every single model is (and always was) behind anything from China.

I wish Europe could find one company that can put us on the map but Mistral’s not it. They have repeatedly shown that extra funding doesn’t magically transfer to better models.

_ink_• 26 days ago

Every single model is (and always was) behind anything from China.

My guess is, that Mistral plays fair and doesn't try to extract data from US models, while Chinese companies are not.

swingboy• 26 days ago

How would export controls apply if OpenAI or Anthropic released a model as open weights? Not that they would, but asking out of curiosity.

echoangle• 26 days ago

It would be illegal for them to release the weights

pheggs• 26 days ago

https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeCode/comments/1u7j3xc/comment...

lwhi2• 26 days ago

The current digital hellscape that's developing is something we've been warned about consistently over the past 30 years.

All these dangers were known and predicted.

There's an uncanny parallel with the climate crisis.

Fatalistic somnambulism.

dgellow11• 26 days ago

But contrary to the climate crisis and what all the AI boosters are saying, it is not inevitable. Its something that is actively being built, it’s not something that just happens. It can be stopped, a different system can exist. The AI crowd also hasn’t proven at all that what they are building can self sustain. So far the economics are monstrously bad, there is no viable business model

Gud3• 26 days ago

The climate “crisis” was also completely preventable but we chose not to.

lwhi2• 26 days ago

So far the economics are monstrously bad, there is no viable business model

Maybe frontier models will end up being traded at a nation state level; much like arms and weapons are.

penguin_booze• 26 days ago

Trusted US organisation: this must be the latest oxymoron.

metaworkers11• 26 days ago

presumably those targeting Gaza, Lebanon and Iran? more effective genocide. A wonderful two party system we have here.

qprofyeh• 26 days ago

No one seeing this as Musk and SpaceX leveraging government support to close the IPO doors on OpenAI and Anthropic?

I know it’s a bold statement but look at this timing and their valuations going south.

dagaci• 26 days ago

So the general public get to bail-out & subsidize Anthropic / and downstream xAI/SpaceX via the State Wallet, but of course with no access.

KoolKat23• 26 days ago

It's fairly obvious at this point, it's a plutocracy.

Oarch• 26 days ago

Makes me question whether de-planetizing Pluto was just a clever tax dodge

morbicer• 25 days ago

Rather cleptocracy. Pedocracy or kakistocracy would also fit.

acallaghan• 26 days ago

When AI bubble pops, no bailouts. I'm not paying for this BS

amarant• 26 days ago

Dear anthropic, please consider moving your entire business to Canada or Europe where you will be allowed to conduct your business without vindictive and Kafkaesque government interference. I would like to have access to your models too!

daseiner1• 26 days ago

famously friendly business environments europe & canada

lol

mschuster91• 26 days ago

Well, as long as you stick to the rules you can do business in Europe and it can't be taken away from you.

As long as you are in the US? No one protects you. Asset forfeiture, arbitrary sanctions, arbitrary tariffs, your employees can get arrested and deported right off the street if they happen to have non-white skin and live in a city under siege by ICE, and if you oppose the regime or just dare to not kiss the ring, say goodbye to planned mergers.

Rule of law matters, and rule of law is gone in the US.

djeastm• 25 days ago

I think Anthropic could manage

petcat4• 26 days ago

where you will be allowed to conduct your business without vindictive and Kafkaesque government interference

Isn't this basically the reason that no major tech labs or startups ever come out of Canada or Europe though?

Filligree• 25 days ago

No, that’s mostly because there’s no capital market for building mid-sized businesses.

Anthropic is past that. They’d have no trouble moving if they wanted to, except the USG could stop them.

kilroy123• 25 days ago

I'd say the UK would be better. DeepMind is in London.

someguyornotidk2• 26 days ago

If this becomes the norm, what incentive does the rest of the world have to keep their markets open to the US?

If US companies have a large unfair advantage such that domestic competitors are no longer able to compete, then wouldn't it make sense for governments around the world to ban or tariff US products and services?

If I was responsible for national economic policy, I would place this at the top of my non-emergency agenda. The world needs to act quick before their industries fail.

spwa47• 26 days ago

The US as a large-scale import nation and so does not need the rest of the world (except perhaps Europe, and only small parts) to keep its markets open to the US.

Even in the European case, Europe would lose much more than the US would if they closed their markets. Plus, a lot of Europe is either very close to breaking point and unwilling to change (Italy), or rapidly worsening into a crash, and unwilling to change (France).

It's Europe that is dependent on a large trade surplus with the rest of the world, financed by dollar loans to 3rd world countries. Now China is taking away their trade surplus, even directly (meaning Europe has a massive trade deficit to China), and indirectly (replacing demand for European goods, famously cars, everywhere). This is causing large-scale job losses in Europe as well as total disaster for government finances across the block, finances that were unhealthy to begin with.

Now Europe and China are unwilling to lend to the rest of the world (because initially that would make very rich Europeans/the CCP a little bit poorer, by raising inflation quite a bit, thereby raising interest rates, which will move government finances from disaster to catastrophe), so if these money flows are to keep going, either the US MUST export to China, which is not happening, or EU and/or China must loan several times their own GDP to the third world, or the EU and/or China must massively increase their dollar holdings (which will, of course, inflate the Euro and Renminbi something awful whichever way it goes). But either WILL happen, because a crash will do that too. Which is what people mean when they say the worldwide system is on a crash course.

someguyornotidk2• 26 days ago

I don't think whether a country is an importer or an exporter matters at this point. This is likely going to develop into a matter of national security. Nations cannot allow most of their domestic industries to be destroyed.

If the US doesn't reverse course soon, I think we'll start seeing large-scale closure of international markets to US companies very soon. Even with US retaliation, there is no other option.

HexPhantom5• 26 days ago

I think this is a bit too deterministic. Even if Europe is in a weak position economically, "the US does not need the rest of the world" seems overstated

fspoettel• 26 days ago

Europe generates ~20% of revenue for US big tech which is a large part of its stock market. With how precariously coupled US growth is to these companies, it absolutely needs that market.

lljk_kennedy• 25 days ago

[citation needed]

FranzFerdiNaN• 25 days ago

America has to be careful not to push Europe into the direction of China though. And with how Trump acts that might happen sooner than they would like. Bullying like how Trump prefers to do only works until some point. Europe mostly seems to bet on America changing its tune again once Trump is gone but we have to wait and see if the rot in America hasnt set in too deep already.

sajithdilshan12• 25 days ago

European economy would implode without trading with US. The biggest economy in Europe, Germany; exports cars, pharmaceuticals and other high end machinery to US and the whole middle class in Germany relies on the jobs from those exports oriented companies

Mairoce2• 25 days ago

Ah yes, the classic “Europe is in decline” narrative favored by Americans. You’d think after more than a decade of that nonsense, people would start to ignore it or at least question its assumptions. Nominal GDP and venture capital funding are not the only things that matter in an economy.

chiply3146• 25 days ago

What the Clown currently does is to push Europe massivly into exactly this.

I can't find it right now but I read news just a few month ago that the EU is working on making it easier to invest into EU similiar to how the Petrodollar currently works.

But if the deindustrialization of germany/EU continues as it currently does and US implodes and China has also issues, we will see how the new world order will look like.

China is for sure more resiliant though. The living standards were never as high as what we as germans are used to and they dont demonstrate.

In the USA people have guns and civil issues and a hard divide between city and country sides.

But as Europe/Germany we should be able to increase our bonds right? Investing into solar/energy transformation; Doesn't matter short term how this will end.

And if AI continues as it does with robotics, we might even see in 50-100 years a complete change in system?

USA Bonds are exploding so they might have overplayed their hand already.

HexPhantom5• 26 days ago

It feels less like a pure tech market now and more like cloud, semiconductors and defense policy all getting mixed together

delta_p_delta_x• 25 days ago

Military-technological industrial complex. Has always been a thing. Nascent WW2 computers were used for artillery, rocket, and bomb guiding.

pythux2• 26 days ago

It might not be a coincidence that POTUS wrote yesterday on Truth Social that 100% tariffs would be imposed on any country proceeding with taxing US' digital services.

chinathrow2• 25 days ago

Pure grift.

graemep6• 25 days ago

Empty threat conditional on something that will never happen.

Most of the rest of the world is too heavily dependent on US digital services to tax them more heavily. From social media to hyperscaler's clouds the US is dominant and stuff will just stop working if they get taxed. There would be a huge pushback from businesses if their government increased the cost of things like AWS.

Edit: edit to say tax more heavily

mandeepj• 25 days ago

Truth Social that 100% tariffs would be imposed

Didn’t he already lost that case? And, all the other countries know that.

grumple3• 26 days ago

Is the rest of the world really that dependent on emerging AI? I don’t think so. The US could cut off all foreign access to AI, nobody would notice.

basisword4• 26 days ago

It would definitely be a problem. A big one. Think of all the multi-national tech companies that have rolled out AI not only to their engineering teams but to their business teams now too. Suddenly your employees in the US can do more and do it quicker than your employees elsewhere. It would be a nightmare to try and manage.

sajithdilshan12• 25 days ago

Unless your country still use only analogue technology your country would definitely will be at the mercy of the country with AI superiority. Mythos showed how good it is at finding vulnerabilities and attack vectors for digital infrastructure. Imagine an attack on power grid which would result in a days long blackout in the middle of winter?

Chance-Device• 25 days ago

Yes, this is exactly the implication. The decoupling of economies between those that have advanced AI, those who do not, and those who decide to ban AI outright or above a certain level of capacity.

mantas• 25 days ago

The rest of the world already has quite a few restrictions.

_heimdall2• 25 days ago

This is far from a new challenge though. Another recent example, China has an advantage on cost of labor and manufacturing, and lack of enforcement of IP rights. They can produce for much cheaper than many other countries but it hasn't led to everyone banning trade with them.

epolanski• 25 days ago

What part of China has cheap qualified labor?

Skilled engineers nowadays demand between southern and central European prices at the very least.

sajithdilshan12• 25 days ago

One would have to have leverage to put tariff on US and not worry about retaliation. Almost every country is tightly coupled with US, let it be trade or reliance on technology.

I can only think of Russia that is decoupled from US at the moment and they are stuck with Putin that still lives with imperial mindset rather than actually being a rival to US

bootsmann• 25 days ago

The US doesn’t have this leverage either, Trump is just uniquely willing to hurt his own country for his own idiosyncrasies. It is pretty established at this point that Americans were the most hurt by his tariffs.

m3kw9• 25 days ago

We don't need more fear mongering with AI, it already made a mess. Industries are not gonna fail, they fall behind, like how US doesn't share weapon tech or certain IP's. Plus you have China providing a close 2nd/3rd place LLM tech for free.

mrtksn• 25 days ago

The incentive is that Americans are huge consumers and closing markets to US also means losing US markets, that's why Trump's taxation on Americans for imports(AKA tariffs) caused huge stir. That said, if the risk is not tolerable then it's not worth it and can be sacrificed. EU was fully on board to do that if Trump invaded Greenland and EU as rest of the world are aggressively diversifying.

BTW EU will never have a "tech" industry in any meaningful size as long as US have access to EU markets, anyone who eventually got tech industry are those who blocked the US or were blocked by US.

So if US keeps its course, in a few years we may end up with fragmented markets with US blocked out because the US is very unpopular but the current politicians everywhere including in the EU are very pro-US actually hoping that current situation is just a glitch, which is not aligned with what the general population demands and as a result the next elections they will align with anti-Americans.

outside12342• 25 days ago

Worse, why would you ever take a dependency on a US company. Even China seems more trustworthy at this point.

varispeed• 25 days ago

You are assuming that governments care and are not corrupt.

I think they have very little room for manoeuvre - companies like AWS or Microsoft can simply you are too cocky and we will shutdown infrastructure your country is running on if you don't bend the knee.

_3u10• 25 days ago

They don’t, they wouldn’t need tariffs if they did.

America mostly produces cheaper ag commodities than the EU but more expensive than South America. Deepseek is already a better search engine than Google. (Not sure if it does Google searches)

Travel the world it’s not American companies gaining market share. I would especially recommend trying Chinese AI or riding in a BYD car and judging for yourself.

WarmWash5• 25 days ago

Its utterly unsurprising that in the reckoning of pro-socialist society (work less, tax more, live easy), the failure of European industry over the last 30 years, utterly unsurprising that the knee-jerk reaction is "You need to share your labor with all of us" rather than "We need to get our shit together and build a competitor"

Europe isn't cooked because it lacks talent, there are untold smart capable people there, it's cooked because it built a social allergy to the very thing it needs most.

Balgair• 25 days ago

The world needs to act quick before their industries fail.

It's a cost problem. If you want to try for a SOTA model, you're going to need to spend big time.

Germany spent ~$115B last year on it's defense, roughly 2% of it's GDP.

In contrast, ~$145B was spent last year just on AI infrastructure by Meta, and, well no one talks about Meta winning any AI races.

mmooss• 25 days ago

If US companies have a large unfair advantage

The US companies with access have a large unfair advantage over other US companies.

Imagine being Rivian if Tesla gets access, Rocket Lab or Blue Origin others if SpaceX gets access, most of SV if major tech companies get access, ... imagine being a startup.

VortexLain• 25 days ago

Welcome to the permanent underclass everyone.

globular-toast• 25 days ago

So close to making it 250 years before becoming just like UK/Europe...

chinathrow2• 25 days ago

Begun the AI wars have.

Havoc2• 25 days ago

Dario really fucked us all with his fear mongering regulatory capture approach cause there is zero chance this reverts back to government deciding it doesn't want the power.

edyos• 25 days ago

They play the game of China, they are stupid. US, as EU, lost everything with this stupid posture.

everyone• 25 days ago

This is just more marketing hype imo.. "omg its sooo good it has to be restricted"

WhereIsTheTruth• 25 days ago

When will the world retaliate? They have been stealing data globally

gcanyon• 25 days ago

Hopefully this points toward Fable becoming available again.

K0balt3• 25 days ago

The real reason, afaik, that the US is trying to restrict access to SOTA models is that a very large component of USA tailored access and surveillance relies on exploits and weaknesses that these models will easily detect.

Thus, it really is an export control issue, but it has nothing to do with offensive capabilities. Offensive capabilities always exist, but pervasive defensibility would upset the asymmetric advantage that attackers, especially the USA, currently have.

There are now Asian models coming , optimized focused on cybersecurity defense at a high level, so I suspect this will be a relatively moot point soon.

LLMs are not great at creating exploits, but they are really good at detecting them. That asymmetry alone is enough to destroy the “offensive capabilities” narrative.

Yes, mythos can find exploitable bugs, even write bench exploits. But real exploits require a good dose of human psychology, and most of the tools needed are off the shelf available anyway. You still need a real cybersecurity expert to effectively weaponize a zero day into a deployable exploit.

But an LLM can inspect payloads, packages, and blobs en masse and find those exploits in a way that was wholly impractical before, so the asymmetric attack advantage is dissolved by strong LLMs.

The USA is trying to protect its cyberwarfare advantage, not protect against attackers. The exact opposite, actually. Porous security is a huge advantage to technologically advanced state actors.

sneak• 25 days ago

If only we had a good term for someone good at this stuff less unwieldy than “cybersecurity expert”. (Then someone could start a news site for us.)

As someone in the field for 30+ years, I find that, generally speaking, the only groups that use this term are charlatans and military/military-adjacent. The military use has been slowly leaking into the general public, but I quite wish it would stop.

K0balt3• 25 days ago

Yes, it should have been cyberwarfare technician.

wrsh076• 25 days ago

This is the most credible-seeming claim about why a competent administration might suspend access (by any means necessary, but also by export controls) to models like Fable

However, I haven't seen any prominent articles proposing this theory, I haven't seen anyone in the administration gesturing towards this as the reason (but haven't been following too closely)

Do you have any sources?

(And in fact, it seemed like an obvious hypothesis that wasn't getting much air time in the first weekend, but again, I didn't see anybody really staking a claim to it except in a few comments or tweets like this one)

K0balt3• 25 days ago

I doubt an administration would openly admit to sabotaging the ability for companies and individuals to safeguard their products against cyberattacks from the US government lol.

That’s pretty much taking the mask all the way off.

It’s the only motive I have seen that aligns with the actual scenario, and if I -did- have inside information I certainly would not be at liberty to cite it publicly lol.

2001zhaozhao• 25 days ago

+1, this is a good thesis. It's plausible and if it's true, then that explains the opaqueness of this whole ordeal and why it's been applied to both OpenAI and Anthropic models now.

_pdp_• 25 days ago

Nooice /s

lobocinza• 25 days ago

This is great for open-source tooling and models. And bad for AI hype which depends on exponential continuous growth.

OptionOfT• 25 days ago

Well, I think right now Antropic is going crazy with their safety rules. I got banned after creating a new account for a new employer. Went through some code with Claude Code, and that's... it. Came back the following morning and I was banned.

10 days for an appeal is too long. Company is a startup, so no team/enterprise support.

zrn900• 25 days ago

God... Nobody else would be able to destroy the US dominance harder and faster than Trump... Though the other party was going to do the same - albeit slowly and more civilly. (Obama admn. started the trade war way back).

U.S. allows Anthropic to release Mythos AI to ‘trusted’ US organizations

Related Stories