Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

64% Positive

Analyzed from 14235 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#government#models#more#anthropic#china#companies#don#access#export#trump

Discussion (755 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

someguyornotidkabout 17 hours 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.

pythuxabout 17 hours 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.
graemepabout 16 hours 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

9devabout 15 hours ago
…and the US is depending on other markets - mostly the EU and China - to keep growing their economy, because the domestic market is pretty saturated with tech already. This has ripple effects too, because 401k pensions depend on big tech to keep growing, so no administration can risk loosing big parts of the European market.
simmerupabout 15 hours ago
We're only dependent on American services because we trusted America

Trump has ruined that, so now we'll be moving to build our own alternatives

dborehamabout 14 hours ago
They're thinking about taxing more heavily because some bright spark decided to tarrif their exports extremely heavily.
masfuerteabout 16 hours ago
Eh? We already tax them. The UK is not alone in having a digital services tax.
mandeepjabout 9 hours ago
> Truth Social that 100% tariffs would be imposed

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

chinathrowabout 17 hours ago
Pure grift.
_heimdallabout 16 hours 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.
epolanskiabout 16 hours ago
What part of China has cheap qualified labor?

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

_heimdallabout 1 hour ago
What type of roles are you considering? Look into their manufacturing, for example. They make all kinds of heavy machineryat costs much lower than US prices, as far as I understand a big contributor is labor costs.

Its also worth noting that st southern and central European labor costs they would still have an advantage over the US.

chiply314about 14 hours ago
Cheap qualified labor doing machining for example.

They def make less than in europe. You make very good money for working at Volkswagen on the line.

And China now also has software developers and even if they make the same amount, they are def also now a big player in the game and take parts of the cake.

Balgairabout 11 hours 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.

HexPhantomabout 17 hours 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_xabout 16 hours ago
Military-technological industrial complex. Has always been a thing. Nascent WW2 computers were used for artillery, rocket, and bomb guiding.
Chance-Deviceabout 16 hours 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.
sajithdilshanabout 15 hours 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

bootsmannabout 14 hours 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.
_3u10about 13 hours 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.

varispeedabout 14 hours 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.

mrtksnabout 14 hours 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.

mantasabout 16 hours ago
The rest of the world already has quite a few restrictions.
m3kw9about 15 hours 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.
WarmWashabout 13 hours 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.

outside1234about 14 hours ago
Worse, why would you ever take a dependency on a US company. Even China seems more trustworthy at this point.
spwa4about 17 hours 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.

someguyornotidkabout 17 hours 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.

mike_hearnabout 15 hours ago
Zero chance of that happening. Europe has already largely deindustrialized and it never closed itself to China. Europe also tried to stop buying Russian oil and failed due to transshipment through India.

It's really sad seeing how little so many of us Europeans understand the situation. America and China hold all the cards, Europe holds none. It makes very little that is both unique and strategic. Decades of left wing economic policies are coming home to roost and there's no way to turn the ship around now.

fspoettelabout 17 hours 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.
sajithdilshanabout 15 hours ago
But can the Europe survive without the US big tech. Imagine the worst case US bans any sort of export from big tech to Europe, all startups and even every tech reliant company in EU would collapse without AWS, Azure or Google cloud. Also imagine ban on exports from Apple and Google, from tomorrow onwards both iPhones and Android phones stops working because software services are banned in EU.

It’s so easy to argue on putting tariff on US tech, but we forget how much Europeans depend on it and it would be like shooting one’s own foot.

One could argue that over the time EU can build their own infrastructure and alternative, but who is going to invest for it? The governments? With tax payers money? And who is going to build it? EU is one of the fastest aging continent in the world and what can they offer to attract young talent?

HexPhantomabout 17 hours 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
chiply314about 14 hours ago
I would even argue that the USA is imploding without China.

The normal USA citicen can't afford a car anymore. Either they make it a lot cheaper over there or they have to continue pressue the USA Citicents to accept that they are not allowed to buy cheap China products.

It will be quitei nteresting to see if we will see a global rebalancing of manufactoring and co around the globe for USA, Europe and China or a overall change in system from pure capitalism to something else.

Or the big players start to reinvest into countries again to have customers who can actually afford it again.

Mairoceabout 15 hours 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.
WarmWashabout 13 hours ago
Europe has no tech industry. It's largely floating on the same economy it had 50 years ago. The situation is beyond dire.
sajithdilshanabout 15 hours 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
NorwegianDudeabout 7 hours ago
To be fair, it would be a bigger issue for the US. No country is more economically dependant on the rest of the world than the US. The US is living on the USD, and if others stop using it the US would have to do extreme cuts on everything.
gmuecklabout 12 hours ago
Cars are largely not exported to the US from Germany, but built in US factories. German car companies have factories all over the world.
makapufabout 15 hours ago
You talk about Europe then only give Germany examples ..? Is that a German only problem ?
lljk_kennedyabout 17 hours ago
[citation needed]
FranzFerdiNaNabout 17 hours 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.
sajithdilshanabout 15 hours ago
Even if America pushes EU to be like China, they cannot be China. China is one country ruled by one law and in a unified vision. On the other hand EU is a band of 27 countries with different laws, different problems and different priorities. They couldn’t even agree on a response for Ukraine-Russian war and present a unified front and do you think they would present a unified front against Americans?
chiply314about 14 hours 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.

grumpleabout 17 hours 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.
sajithdilshanabout 15 hours 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?
Planktonneabout 11 hours ago
> your country would definitely will be at the mercy of the country with AI superiority

People claim this, but it doesn't seem to be the case at all. We have multiple ongoing conflicts between countries currently, and we're not seeing huge gains from those with more access to AI.

basiswordabout 17 hours 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.
graemepabout 16 hours ago
That only applies to things Mythos does better than Opus. Mythos is supposedly very good at things such as finding vulnerabilities, but is it better at business tasks? IN the short time I had access to Fable it did not seem noticeably better at things I tried it for (lots of small tasks).

Maybe it is better at vibe coding or finding security flaws, but at how much is it sufficiently better to be worth paying the extra?

grumpleabout 16 hours ago
I disagree. I work at a very large international corporation. How much revenue do you think we’ve seen due to AI? I’d guess it’s zero. I know for the groups whose finances I see, it’s zero. Yet costs have gone way up. There’s a bunch of new code, but not anything customers are going to pay more for.

And either way no AI basically puts you back to where we were last year. US employees have always been far more productive, that’s nothing new.

K0baltabout 13 hours 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.

wrsh07about 10 hours 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)

K0baltabout 9 hours 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.

wrsh07about 3 hours ago
The administration hasn't been so good at keeping the mask on but fair!

Was hoping someone else had proposed it though. It's a good thought

2001zhaozhaoabout 3 hours 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.
sneakabout 10 hours 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.

K0baltabout 9 hours ago
Yes, it should have been cyberwarfare technician.
theahuraabout 23 hours 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

naturalmovementabout 23 hours ago
because the Export Administration Regulations are administered by the US Dept of Commerce.

you're welcome

nazgobabout 21 hours ago
Does it apply to USA citizens and organizations as well?
Maxiousabout 18 hours ago
Fun fact the 1996 cryptography restrictions have never been repealed. You just haven't heard of them as open source software has broadly been exempted https://www.linuxfoundation.org/resources/publications/under...
polski-gabout 20 hours ago
Yes
jchookabout 23 hours ago
And it's Howard Lutnick... the guy who lived next door to Epstein and magically wasn't at work on 9/11.
bfleschabout 16 hours ago
Downvotes every time this topic comes up because Epstein was deeply ingrained into the VC world.
kurthrabout 23 hours ago
So no need to do any deep consideration or evaluation, just the approval of the Epstein class.
nickpetersonabout 15 hours ago
You're completely wrong here, they make sure the check clears.
ed_elliott_ascabout 20 hours 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.
0000000000100about 19 hours 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.
Schiendelmanabout 11 hours ago
I can see a limited way this benefits Anthropic. They've been having issues with one or more Chinese companies using Anthropic models' outputs at high scale to train their own models. By restricting Fable and Mythos temporarily and then rolling out to their most important customers first, then requiring identity verification, they may be able to slow that behavior significantly.
ed_elliott_ascabout 18 hours ago
Yeah, what better marketing than the US government thinks it is too powerful?

[edit: don’t forget my previous tin foil hat note, I’m not overly serious about this]

qtk8about 19 hours ago
It could be that the us govt doesn't want china to execute distillation attacks and narrow the gap.
saidnooneeverabout 19 hours ago
why not? they have been sued for 1.5Billion, with a B. do you think you get that because you play fair or are such great guys...? how much money do they spend on lobbying? if you count it you will see it. if not then perhaps do some homework and open your eyes.
close04about 18 hours ago
Anthropic is successfully burning bridges behind them and making the path to profitability impossible for anyone coming from behind. If your model is “allowed by US administration” it’s an implicit admission that it’s either underperforming or undermined.

Thanks to these big guys the odds are stacking against any fresh competition. Data sources have dried up and training material is harder to get, regulation is controlling any advanced model, prices are inaccessible now, and they’re seeking that courts cut off the rest of the avenues, including the ones they used to get where they are.

ben_wabout 19 hours ago
While I also regard the "doom from the companies themselves is just a marketing stunt" arguments as conspiracy-theory territory (especially since neither OpenAI nor Anthropic* changed their tune since before they were rich enough for meaningful lobbying):

This particular specific doom is from the USG, Trump has a history of kayfabe, and there's a stink of market manipulation coming from the White House.

* Musk, however, you can totally have: "With artificial intelligence, we are summoning the demon" in 2014 to "if I go ahead and build this enormous robot army, can I just be ousted at some point in the future?" in 2025.

linohhabout 19 hours ago
corruption
mlinsey1 day 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

zarzavatabout 23 hours 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.

llelouchabout 16 hours ago
>Anthropic themselves argued that the technology is dangerous.

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

A_D_E_P_Tabout 13 hours ago
Never is a long time. When open models catch up in 4-12 months, they might change their minds.
naturalmovementabout 23 hours 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.

hagemtabout 23 hours ago
> It's really frustrating to read pages of comments rooted in emotion and no understanding of the existing laws.

I read your frustration. Try to let go of the fact that there are many smart people who aren't experts in legal affairs. Cite eCFR if they're wrong, and move on. As much as they don't know the rules, you don't know their situation.

For all you know, the subscriber may be a US Citizen + Delaware C Corp owner.

zarzavatabout 23 hours ago
That was in reference to whether anyone outside of Anthropic might be able to have standing to sue at all, not the merits of the case.
IshKebababout 21 hours ago
> Anthropic themselves argued that the technology is dangerous

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

zarzavatabout 2 hours ago
Fable = Mythos + guardrails

Fable + jailbreak = Mythos

LoganDarkabout 9 hours ago
"Mythos-class models" were banned, which includes both Fable and Mythos itself.
re-thcabout 21 hours 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.

polski-gabout 20 hours ago
Lockheed Martin is able to restrict access of their product details to only us citizens.

It's not impossible, it's just hard.

wahnfriedenabout 23 hours ago
Are you certain? Trump admin is hand-picking GPT 5.6 winners
zarzavatabout 22 hours ago
The Government's position is that Anthropic/OpenAI are forbidden from allowing non-US citizens use the models. This is impossible in reality because how can Anthropic know that the person sitting behind a Claude code session or API key is at any given moment a US citizen? You can check their ID on signup but how can they know that they didn't give their credentials to someone else to use? They can't.

Given the impossibility of compliance, what Anthropic and OpenAI are doing is working with the government to release it to certain organizations with the government's blessing.

If this were about missiles and not AI models, nobody would question this turn of events. If the government said that nobody can export this missile or allow non-citizens access to the missile, and then they started giving permission for certain organizations to handle the missile, that would be normal, not picking winners.

The only reason people are questioning it in this case is because they believe that these models are not dangerous enough to deserve these kinds of export controls. Personally I'd agree that in my 3 days of using Fable I didn't observe any superpowers. Unfortunately however, Anthropic undermined that argument by claiming that Mythos is highly dangerous, which set them up for any jailbreak of Fable to be considered a national security risk. Who is a court going to believe? Someone who used a model for 3 days? Or the government and the people who made that model?

naturalmovementabout 24 hours 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.

sethammonsabout 20 hours 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.

polski-gabout 19 hours ago
Anthropic doesn't have the right to release weapons technologies on the open Internet, that's the point.

Lockheed doesn't whine that they aren't allowed to sell their products for a $20/mo subscription to everyone with a pulse.

itopaloglu83about 17 hours 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.

threethirtytwoabout 24 hours 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.
bluegattyabout 24 hours 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.

koolalaabout 23 hours ago
Maybe they would prefer Nationalization more than an IPO.
siva7about 24 hours ago
sue? whom? usa? have fun..
seizethecheeseabout 24 hours ago
US government regularly loses lawsuits and has to backtrack policy.
reasonablekloutabout 24 hours ago
intrasight1 day ago
They could just ignore Trump as he has no authority to so limit a private company.
mlinsey1 day 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.

vachinaabout 17 hours ago
US sounds like a communist country.
jandrewrogers1 day 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.
LamaOfRuin1 day ago
None of them have asserted that export controls apply to whatever domestic distribution the administration says that never leaves the country.
ericmay1 day 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.
mcmcmc1 day ago
Not just in court. The Trump admin would have no problem dragging them in off the street. You can now get a 50 year terrorism sentence for punishing zines - I imagine flagrantly granting access to unapproved parties would be treated similarly.
naturalmovementabout 24 hours 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.

jvanderbot1 day 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.
matheusmoreiraabout 21 hours 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.
rdtscabout 21 hours 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.

KingMobabout 18 hours 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.

theturtletalks1 day 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.

baqabout 19 hours ago
I’m on record saying mistral needs 50B euros asap; I’ll admit this was wrong, they need more sooner
re-thcabout 19 hours ago
Doesn’t help unless they get GPUs or equivalent to train.
notrealyme123about 19 hours ago
With enough money this problem is solvable. GPUs alone are only a fraction of a frontier model.
dgellowabout 18 hours ago
Im really not convinced that can be solved with money alone. China has the money and infrastructure, they don’t have the chips. Europe doesn’t have the infrastructure or the money but may have some chips
jstummbilligabout 17 hours ago
Musk tried, no?
klohtoabout 18 hours 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_about 17 hours 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.

OtherShrezzingabout 20 hours 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?

ben_wabout 19 hours 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).

t0mas88about 20 hours 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.
spacebanana7about 19 hours 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.
itopaloglu83about 17 hours ago
Or in the case of ASML machines, any company you can pressure to comply with your policies either by restricting their access to the technology you control or politics between governments.
dgellowabout 18 hours ago
It’s whatever the Trump admin decides. There are no rules here, we are past that
TiredOfLifeabout 19 hours ago
Restrictions are on good models. You might as well ask what would happen when Microsoft open sources Office
SkitterKherpiabout 19 hours 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.
re-thcabout 18 hours 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.

bel8about 22 hours 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.

sschuellerabout 21 hours 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.

varjagabout 21 hours ago
Not sure why people here are so upbeat about China. It is almost guaranteed it will also introduce export controls on the models.
moooo99about 20 hours ago
> It is almost guaranteed it will also introduce export controls on the models.

The current models are open weights and already out the door. They are hosted by many providers and are already comparatively good in many domains. Even if this generation is the last one to be open, I‘d argue it would already put the US providers in trouble

kulahanabout 21 hours ago
I’ve been asking myself this question quite a bit lately. People seem to suddenly think China is a good alternative to the US hegemony status. I sincerely hope I’m just misreading things.
dgellowabout 18 hours ago
Right now they are the one competing openly
win311fwgabout 18 hours ago
Export controls are only a strategic advantage if the export destinations don't already have the same (or better) technology. That time may come, but first China needs to export to destroy the AI industry in the USA.
expedition32about 17 hours ago
I disagree. With America turtling up into a Christian nationalist theocracy the world is China's to win. They still want free trade.
HexPhantomabout 17 hours ago
Where the frontier labs still have a business is probably not casual consumer chat
andxorabout 21 hours ago
That's not what is implied. Fable may still be widely available.
cubefoxabout 17 hours ago
... in the US.
9devabout 15 hours ago
Be gentle, foreigners using the internet is still a pretty new concept to them
cmrdporcupineabout 13 hours 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.

HexPhantomabout 17 hours ago
I share the sadness, but I'm not sure the consumer market was ever the main prize here
timurlenkabout 21 hours ago
Well, now I'm rooting for the Europeans/chinese to develop something better and release it.

One can hope.

johnisgoodabout 22 hours ago
Cannot you just obtain them the same way you would obtain any copyrighted material and use them locally?
ifwintercoabout 21 hours 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

alanwreath1 day 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.

ryandrakeabout 22 hours 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.
ASinclairabout 13 hours 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
deauxabout 23 hours 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.
c2h5oh1 day 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

drcode1 day ago
they're flailing is what they're doing
conception1 day ago
They are collecting tribute is what they are doing.
altcognitoabout 24 hours ago
And they are just getting started.

It sounds insidious, and it probably would be if they weren’t so damn dumb.

lawnabout 23 hours ago
Grift. It's all about the grift.
SpicyLemonZest1 day ago
Is there any evidence at all that would convince you that they're trying to mitigate real risks that actually exist?
digitaltreesabout 24 hours 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.

Avicebron1 day 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"

scarmigabout 23 hours ago
The latter question is 100% reasonable, and something I also fall on.

But there's definitely a large contingent who denies that they think there's any risk at all, instead of them engaging in motivated reasoning to think their self interest just so happens to coincide with what is best for safety.

nozzlegearabout 24 hours ago
Is there any evidence at all that would convince you they're just blowing smoke up our asses in pursuit of money?
teliosixabout 20 hours 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.

JackC1 day 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.

Alien1Being1 day 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.

tyre1 day 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.

jeroenhd1 day 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.

ThatMedicIsASpyabout 21 hours ago
America can't be trusted since the patriot act - the day I said to myself I'll never visit.

And I can't trust my gov to grow some balls and say we will no longer negotiate with a senile old child raping man baby.

I can't even trust any company having their workers include or upload my data to a free AI model.

ra1 day ago
I agree. Our greatest nation-threats are not the countries we're told they are.
orwinabout 21 hours ago
> If you're afraid of industrial espionage, Chinese companies may be a risk

Read about GE and Alstom and how the US government (under Obama) forced the sell at a discount, without a true GE financial audit.

No, experience tell if you're a foreign company owner, you risk less allying with the CCP than with the US. At worst with the CCP you'll lose your IP, with the US you will get arrested and be forced to 'sell' (I.E. you'll get overpriced stocks)

ElProlactinabout 24 hours ago
> Taiwan, perhaps, but they're playing a long-term tactical game rather than a "invade the country we don't like this week" game.

So one of the world's biggest and most rapid military build-ups in history that is largely intended to give China the ability to seize a democratic country by force by 2027 over any US/Western efforts to protect it is OK because...it's "a long-term tactical game"?

Note that China is not just menacing Taiwan. It's constantly harassing Japan, the Philippines and Vietnam too. Other countries in the region are worried because they understand that if China takes Taiwan successfully, it's not likely to stop there and become a good, peaceful neighbor.

The US, under Trump, is a foreign policy disaster. That doesn't mean that China, with a seemingly more emotionally stable dictator at the helm, is any less dangerous.

> 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.

With all due respect, you're really naive about how China operates.

https://www.wired.com/story/chineses-surveillance-state-is-s...

wyrdcurtabout 24 hours 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.

itopaloglu83about 16 hours ago
> the government overseas that has no direct effect on my life

Yet.

Things change as well, in all sides. The US might swing back to normal with the next election, or China worse, or vice-versa.

thewebguydabout 22 hours 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.

rcr-anti1 day 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.
nickthegreek1 day 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.
plandis1 day 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.

woctordhoabout 22 hours ago
Don't trust US or China. Trust the open source community.
foogazi1 day ago
What if the model is hosted on a 3rd party site ?
matheusmoreiraabout 20 hours 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.
deauxabout 23 hours 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.

ls6121 day 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.
ebbi1 day ago
Given recent history, I'd be more likely to be killed by American actions than Chinese ones.
digitaltreesabout 24 hours ago
Except the open weights can live on your hardware so no one gets your tokens.
greenavocado1 day ago
China won't arrest you for wrongthink where you live now
LNSY1 day ago
At least China isn't a terrorist state run by Jeffery Epstein Associates. It's a nation run by engineers, and it has flaws, but at least the people at the top know how to read.
surgical_fireabout 20 hours 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.

expedition32about 17 hours ago
Not worshipping Jesus and his earthly apostle Trump is in my country's interest though.
DANmode1 day ago
Safer?
hajileabout 24 hours ago
If I can run it locally, it is certainly more safe than running on some cloud server somewhere.
DANmodeabout 23 hours ago
Others nations’ models run offline, too.
micromacrofoot1 day ago
well at least they're a little further away
exabrial1 day ago
How does my small company become a "trusted partner"?
willsmith721 day ago
Oh you thought this was a competitive free market?
t0mas88about 20 hours 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.
lantryabout 13 hours ago
"there are in-groups that the law protects but does not bind, and out-groups that the law binds but does not protect"

i.e. freedom for me but not for thee

flipbradabout 24 hours ago
Donate to his ballroom project, perhaps? Pay for tokens with his crypto coin?
apexalphaabout 22 hours ago
Donate money to your President, probably.
phaserabout 22 hours ago
Easy, pivot to the military industrial complex, dummy!
goatlover1 day ago
This administration doesn't care about small companies anymore than it cares about regular Americans.
Dig1tabout 24 hours 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.
vinay427about 22 hours ago
> This is exactly what they’ve been asking for.

This doesn't directly follow from the first part of your comment, and more importantly seems inaccurate with respect to Anthropic's public statements on this situation. For example:

> As we have stated publicly, we believe the government should have the ability to block unsafe deployments, as part of a statutory process that is transparent, fair, clear, and grounded in technical facts. This action does not adhere to those principles.

https://www.anthropic.com/news/fable-mythos-access

matheusmoreiraabout 21 hours ago
Their true intentions were to get the government to regulate open weight models while leaving them alone. Government went after them instead.

As enjoyable as the sheer irony of the situation is, this is a terrible development... Not only are foreign peasants like me cut off from the best models, so are the chinese AI labs that were distilling them into open weights for the rest of us to enjoy. This sudden acceleration has been genuinely terrifying, I'm not sure what to expect of the future anymore.

Advertisement
OkWing99about 19 hours 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?
cogman10about 2 hours ago
Yeah, it seems like this makes a massive cut into their possible revenue.
DrProticabout 18 hours ago
I have a feeling that’s the same question Whitehouse asked Anthropic and OpenAI.
dgellowabout 18 hours ago
Ask SpaceX. There is no rational for those valuations, it’s pure FOMO
avaer1 day 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.

aesthesia1 day 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.
digitaltreesabout 23 hours 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

TheDongabout 18 hours 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.
tyre1 day ago
Could you explain this like I'm 35?
__alexsabout 20 hours 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.

dgellowabout 18 hours 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

bvcpabout 18 hours ago
Watch the eu do the same thing
__alexsabout 16 hours 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.
dgellowabout 18 hours 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
subscribedabout 19 hours 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.
vld_chkabout 20 hours 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.

__alexsabout 20 hours 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.

amarantabout 17 hours 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!
petcatabout 17 hours 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?

Filligreeabout 13 hours 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.

kilroy123about 15 hours ago
I'd say the UK would be better. DeepMind is in London.
daseiner1about 17 hours ago
famously friendly business environments europe & canada

lol

djeastmabout 13 hours ago
I think Anthropic could manage
mschuster91about 17 hours 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.

2838383838about 17 hours ago
lmao

you have never tried to start a business in europe

pro tip you better have family in high places

goldenarmabout 19 hours 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?
ben_wabout 19 hours 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

merekabout 19 hours ago
Why London of all places?
goldenarmabout 19 hours 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.
dansquizsoftabout 18 hours ago
> Talent concentration

Lol

ascorbicabout 15 hours ago
Deepmind is based there. Anthropic's biggest research base outside the US is there. OpenAI has just announced a big new office there.
cherryteastainabout 19 hours 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.

eamagabout 19 hours ago
They already have offices in London and Zurich, but it doesn't let them to escape anything
goldenarmabout 19 hours ago
I know, but what about leaving the US entirely to escape the export bans ? Like ByteDance and Shein left China for Singapore.
theplumberabout 19 hours ago
London sucks, not to mention the UK’s political future seems even more nationalistic than MAGA
Hawkenfall1 day ago
This appears to be only for Mythos 5 access, NOT Fable 5.
irthomasthomas1 day ago
So only 100 companies have exclusive access to frontier AI.
andsoitis1 day 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.

foogazi1 day ago
Tri-modal distribution of frontier AI
sourthyme1 day ago
Aren't these the same models?
aesthesia1 day 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.
qsxfthnkp23221 day ago
Fable was available to me as a normal person using Claude.ai

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

ryan_n1 day ago
Until the chinese make a comparable open source model at some point
paxys1 day ago
Mythos doesn't have the strict safeguards of Fable and is only accessible by a very small number of pre-approved companies.
theahuraabout 23 hours ago
usgov picking winners and losers in AI --> usgov picking winners and losers in every industry (speedrun, any %)
OptionOfTabout 10 hours 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.

jimnotgymabout 20 hours ago
This will be more validation that the rest of the world needs to be very wary of US technology.
chvidabout 21 hours 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.
Advertisement
dagaciabout 18 hours 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.
KoolKat23about 18 hours ago
It's fairly obvious at this point, it's a plutocracy.
morbicerabout 16 hours ago
Rather cleptocracy. Pedocracy or kakistocracy would also fit.
Oarchabout 18 hours ago
Makes me question whether de-planetizing Pluto was just a clever tax dodge
tonyrice1 day ago
I'm looking forward to better open source models. Now I just need to afford the compute to run these models.
randomNumber7about 19 hours ago
Most people can't afford 6 digits for hardware that deprecates in a couple of years.
andrewchambers1 day ago
This seems like it will have pretty huge negative affects on startups needing to compete with 'trusted partners'
andy991 day 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)

pdimitar1 day 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.

didibusabout 23 hours ago
> I don't have too much unknowns in my work, I simply have way too much to do.

Interesting, I'm curious what work you do? My software engineering career has never been in that situation, it's always so much ambiguity and unknown that trumps everything.

tbcj1 day ago
Fable wasn’t available for a full week. It was released on June 9 and made unavailable June 12.
afavour1 day 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.
paytonjjones1 day ago
I don't think that follows.

Say you had a perfectly smooth progressive chain from rocks to spears to guns to nuclear weapons. When it comes to government restrictions, you still have to choose to draw lines somewhere, right?

ares6231 day ago
The enemy is both all-powerful and pathetic, at the same time, all the time.
xorgun1 day ago
Yes, i do. I have 10xd my productivity since last year and im not smarter. And yes my code is high quality
A_D_E_P_T1 day ago
Startups don't have as much money to spend on lobbying and gifts, though.
slashdave1 day ago
Well... there are crypto startups, and perhaps a generous definition of "money"
tyre1 day ago
Crypto companies were built for anonymous transfers of wealth. It's why they are perfect for money laundering and corruption. Venture backed companies are more difficult, since you would need a paper trail (equity, incorporation documents, beneficial owners, etc.)

It's not impossible, of course. It's not even terribly difficult, but it does require a different level of record.

(No, I'm not saying that the goons running the United States give a shit or won't do it anyway.)

ares6231 day 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.
airstrike1 day ago
The single most important question to be discussed on this website right now.
penguin_boozeabout 18 hours ago
Trusted US organisation: this must be the latest oxymoron.
bastard_op1 day 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?

SwellJoe1 day 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.

lwhiabout 18 hours 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.

dgellowabout 18 hours 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
Gudabout 18 hours ago
The climate “crisis” was also completely preventable but we chose not to.
dgellowabout 18 hours ago
It was, yes. The difference is that if we stop the AI stuff, it stops. There is no external feedback loop that sustain itself. The climate crisis, after we pass some thresholds (and we likely did), that becomes out of human control
lwhiabout 17 hours 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.

jurschreuderabout 23 hours 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.

gizzlonabout 21 hours 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
__natty__1 day ago
And we get the news the same time OpenAI releases 5.6. What a coincidence?
mrandish1 day 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.

qprofyehabout 18 hours 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.

Advertisement
chopete31 day 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?

espeedabout 23 hours 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).
tracerbulletx1 day 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.
coffeemug1 day 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.

tzs1 day 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.

to11mtm1 day ago
until it isn't, i.e. certain rulings over the last couple years...
calvinmorrison1 day ago
right, and one minute to the next a gun you bought could be a crime to own and land you in jail LOL.

congress has abdicated its role entirely.

sigmar1 day ago
The ATF was created by an act of congress. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_Control_Act_of_1968
tick_tock_tick1 day 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?

digitaltreesabout 23 hours ago
No. But it could be done in accordance with the rule of law and commitment to equal access rather than an ad hoc approach that creates the impression of corruption and picking winners.
verelo1 day ago
None of those things are knowledge. I think theres something specific around limiting access to knowledge and capabilities that makes this feel insidious.
Jblx21 day ago
Information is covered by ITAR, so that's not new. You can illegally export information about an ITAR covered item by just allowing a foreign national the potential to see an item. They don't even have to prove the foreign national actually did see it.

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-22/chapter-I/subchapter-M...

standardUser1 day 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".
GolfPopper1 day ago
I would say, "sitting smugly astride the monster's back, confident that they will never be fed to it".
UncleEntity1 day 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.

delichon1 day ago
Congress passed the Arms Export Control Act (22 USC 2778) in the Ford administration and it has been applied to software since at least the Clinton administration.
skywhopper1 day ago
It has never taken a constitutional amendment to make something illegal.
jiggawatts1 day ago
"Malboro cigarettes may once again be sold, but Newport remains banned for everyone except large purchasers that have paid the appropriate bri... fees."
motbus31 day ago
I wonder what kind of emergency will happen when real elections get around
az2261 day ago
And even if a court places an injunction on the ban, it's possible Anthropic will still choose to keep it unavailable.
tiahura1 day 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.
actionfromafar1 day 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

twoodfin1 day 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.
preg_match1 day ago
That repealing the chevron doctrine was a calculated play in the unitary executive theory. We all know congress is basically useless these days. But we also know that regulation isn’t, like, optional. It’s going to happen no matter what.

So what’s left? Where does that decision making go? Turns out the executive, so that’s what we’ve been seeing and it’s largely uncontested. This should have been obvious to most people going into this, particularly if they understood Trumps platform or Project 2025.

tchalla1 day ago
Do you remember the export controls on Covid vaccine material during the height of coronavirus? I do
bluecalm1 day 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?

dansquizsoftabout 18 hours ago
It's bad, very bad, for the frontier labs.
gcanyonabout 14 hours ago
Hopefully this points toward Fable becoming available again.
outside12341 day ago
Is there a list of the partners that get access? That should be public, right?
mikestorrent1 day ago
Bless your heart
HexPhantomabout 20 hours ago
Hard to see how this does not turn into export controls for models, just with a lot more ambiguity
lobocinzaabout 13 hours ago
This is great for open-source tooling and models. And bad for AI hype which depends on exponential continuous growth.
layla5alive1 day ago
The Cantillon Effect applied to machine intelligence..
jandrewrogers1 day ago
+1 Insightful
Bluesteinabout 12 hours ago
Indeed. Very much so. It puts a name to something that is happening.-
swingboyabout 19 hours 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.
echoangleabout 19 hours ago
It would be illegal for them to release the weights
Advertisement
edyosabout 16 hours ago
They play the game of China, they are stupid. US, as EU, lost everything with this stupid posture.
niraj898about 19 hours ago
The funny thing is, they are planning to just use it for US government and not allow public to use fable 5 atleast..
kristopolous1 day ago
Next time someone tells you this is the party of free market and small government, I guess you just laugh now?
GolfPopper1 day 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.
z3c01 day ago
Growing up rural, the grift has been obvious my whole ĺife
jandrewrogers1 day 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.

digitaltrees1 day ago
But it was applied using principles of the rule of law with clear regulatory frameworks. This is not that
jandrewrogers1 day ago
I’ve dealt with these regulations across several administrations. Nothing about this is novel, it is just receiving more attention than usual. Anyone could have started caring about this decades ago. You are making an argument from unfamiliarity with the regulations as practiced.

If it takes Trump to force people to educate themselves on how the US government actually works then I guess that is at least one good thing to come out of this.

sagarm1 day ago
Jumping in to reflexively defend the admin again, I see.

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

jandrewrogers1 day ago
I am making an observation of fact. My feeds are full of ignorant hot takes that clearly demonstrate people have no clue about current law or how the government actually works. Your response is a perfect demonstration of this. This is neither unique to the current administration nor supporters of a particular party.

I don’t support the admin but if you are unwilling to engage with reality then that is on you.

davesque1 day 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.
typeofhuman1 day ago
The only correct reply.
digitaltrees1 day ago
If by correct you mean, inconsistent with the American tradition of the rule of law and commitment to equal protection of the law, and the emergence of an authoritarian kleptocracy that picks winners and losers. Then yes. Correct.
y1n01 day 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.
rikfckfj2841 day 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

Gagarin19171 day ago
Now?
seemaze1 day 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.
m4nu3l1 day 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).
plaguuuuuu1 day ago
You can't prove your free-market theory because it's not falsifiable.

This is why arguments about this go in circles. You either argue from a pure theoretic POV back and forth, or you go off data - at which point, bringing up every failure of free markets (like, obviously, US healthcare) is dismissed as "not really a free market"

Even the theoreticians on the free-market side are far less solid than.. all the other sides (behavioural economics, information asymmetry.. even Marx) but I regard it as deeply unpragmatic when there's so much data out there indicating what actually happens in the real world when you go one way or the other.

gverrilla1 day ago
> A/B test we had on society over the 20th century.

Well, by your own logic, there's a new a/b test running right now. Its results aren't exactly going your way.

digitaltrees1 day ago
Yes. But that was the “big government democrat” argument that republicans said was evil and un American.
sharts1 day ago
Free for me, not for thee
nutjob21 day ago
Also free speech/the first amendment and various other rights people are supposed to have but don't in practice.
DANmode1 day ago
Fourth Amendment, through corporate data purchase or exfiltration.
digitaltrees1 day ago
If you laugh you’re a communist and against Christianity and part of a satanic cabal.
kristopolousabout 14 hours ago
these days my actual policy is to find whoever is being slandered as a communist and vote for them.
az2261 day ago
Not just that, Biden administration started with some AI regulation that the Trump administration nixed, and then outright banning models. Lunacy.
ch4s31 day 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.
digitaltrees1 day ago
Yes they have.
ch4s31 day ago
Not really. They’re all lousy pro tariffs, anti immigration, pro tech regulations, and so on. Paul Ryan is gone.
ryanar1 day ago
its all trump, he is a megalomaniac, not affiliated with any party but his own
afavour1 day ago
They have affiliated themselves to him. Watch, within a month of Democrats being back in power they’ll be harping small government, denigrating the national debt they ballooned themselves. There’s no reason to help them attempt to disavow it.
Klathmon1 day ago
But it's not just him, it's the entire party aggressively supporting him and everything he does.
andsoitis1 day ago
> the entire party aggressively supporting him and everything he does.

That's untrue.

If you do some homework you will see Republican politicians and the Supreme Court disagreeing on a number of issues. Amongst Republican voters, his approval rating has been sliding and is now below 80% in most polls.

atlgator1 day ago
They passed one major piece of legislation since he took office and it was loaded with pork to get everyone onboard. I wouldn't call that aggressive. The Right is very fractured right now.
gkoberger1 day ago
Trump has an 87% approval rating amongst Republicans as of the last poll I can find.

While Trump is a megalomanic and does whatever he wants, he has the mandate of the Republican party, whose elected officials could choose at any moment to end this by withdrawing support.

Don't let them off the hook.

andsoitis1 day ago
> Trump has an 87% approval rating amongst Republicans as of the last poll I can find.

It's lower than that. Most polls show below 80%.

> Don't let them off the hook.

That's not the way.

ryanmcbride1 day ago
it's actually the entire party that's propping him up. If it was just trump he would be living on the street.
keyle1 day ago
It seems people can flip that coin whenever it suits them.
servercobra1 day ago
And yet the rest of the party falls in behind him.
malcolmgreaves1 day ago
The entire Republican party in all branches of government is supporting Trump. His politics and the Republican party politics are one and the same. The last election the party did not have a platform because, quite literally, they said that whatever Trump says _is_ their platform.
jknoepfler1 day ago
He's a Republican backed by the Republican establishment funded by Republican donors and massively influential in Republican primaries. Republicans voted him into power twice. Republicans pushed his voter fraud narrative. Republicans embraced his vaccine skepticism and killed countless Americans. Republicans voted for his ICE policies that murdered two citizens of my home state.

Republicans caused this disaster and are all, each and every, individually morally responsible for putting Trump in power.

Republican voters, Republican politicians, Republican donors and the Republican political machine.

They picked the losing side of history and they can sink with it.

JPKab1 day 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?
ribosometronome1 day 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.

Alupis1 day 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.
SpicyLemonZest1 day ago
If you don't want the current administration to be blindly hated, perhaps you should ask the president to stop publishing daily statements about how much he hates various people. You reap what you sow.
paulddraper1 day ago
Then cry as you look for the free market/small government leaders.
paytonjjones1 day 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)

brokencode1 day 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.

drdaeman1 day ago
What rules, though?

Bernie and AOC (which aren't DNC mainstream, but prominent) had just pushed for a moratorium on "AI data centers" with a definition that includes "that are used for the development or operation of AI models at scale" (trivially sidesteppable by "we build this GPU farm to sell to whoever bids for compute" - which is actually true), plus a bunch of fancy extras bundled in like "The government must review and approve AI products before they are released to ensure that AI products are safe and effective.", while lacking actual definition of "AI" (given that we had "AI" systems since '50s).

Here's the full text: https://www.sanders.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/AI-Data-Ce...

Yeah, the bill has a cause - it recognizes some pain points. But then it haphazardly tries to address symptoms instead of underlying issues (environmental regulations, utility pricing, land use, job security), while pushing vaguely defined regulations that allow arbitrary application. As if misdirected measures and poorly defined laws aren't already a giant issue.

polski-gabout 19 hours ago
Congress did regulate weapons access when they passed the AECA almost 50 years ago. The rules have been refined via ITAR over time. This isn't arbitrary.
FireBeyond1 day ago
> the perception of political decision making

The what? More like "the whims of an eighty year old in cognitive decline and those wishing to curry or keep his favor" - quite an expansive definition of "political decision making".

ThunderSizzle1 day ago
Obamacare, but for AI, where every American has to now pay a penalty to not use AI or something like that?

That was the last major thing the Democrats did, and healthcare has gotten substantially worse...but at least it's well regulated now.

tick_tock_tick1 day ago
> I think they’d try to get something through Congress to regulate the industry in a rules-based way.

Is that a joke? We're back in a spat with Iran because Obama refused to engage with Congress, as required by our constitution, to enter the USA in any binding deal.

Any AI actions from the next admin is going to be executive yolos.

4lx871 day 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...

andsoitis1 day ago
> Democrats had a pragmatic policy under Biden

How well does it stand up to Mythos?

JPKab1 day ago
Marc Andreesen has first-hand knowledge that absolutely refutes what you are saying.

The Democratic party is more anti-ai than the Republican party and unfortunately both of them are increasingly responding to astroturfed populism.

Do you think Bernie Sanders in AOC are pro-ai? Are you kidding me? Have you seen what they say and the legislation they propose?

jknoepfler1 day 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

danans1 day 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.

MaxPock1 day ago
Republicans trust Americans with guns and not an LLM. That should tell you something.
GolfPopper1 day ago
It tells me that the people who buy Republican politicians make money from selling Americans guns, and somebody with influence thinks they can make money by restricting LLM release.
bilsbie1 day ago
Which party is?
iAMkenough1 day ago
The one currently running the show.
jmyeet1 day 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.

paulddraper1 day ago
The it did a pretty shit job of it. Within 100 years it was killing hundreds of thousands to fight against that purpose.
jmyeet1 day ago
Lincoln disagrees [1]:

> My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that.

While chattel slavery ended when the 13th Amendment was ratified in 1865, slavery continued through debt bondage and convict leasing up until 1941 where FDR suddenly decided to aggressively prosecute the practice for fear of the Japanese using it for propaganda value. I'm referring to Circular 3591 [2]. And while that heavily curtailed abuse (eg by locking people up essentially indefinitely for "vagrancy" or imaged debts), forced prison labor continues to this day, including private companies profiting from prison labor.

Also, while the Confederacy lost the Civil War, the South arguably won. Reconstruction saw severe curtailment of newly-established civil rights for former enslaved people. And after Reconstruction came Jim Crow until the 1960s.

[1]: https://www.loc.gov/collections/abraham-lincoln-papers/artic...

[2]: https://www.endslaverynow.org/blog/articles/state-imposed-fo...

mullingitover1 day ago
The point of slavery was money, and the point of money was power. By the time of the civil war the real power for the ruling class was coming from industrialization.
monksy1 day ago
I can't wait till employees start helping with the distillation process.
olalonde1 day ago
It feels the U.S. is moving closer to a textbook definition of crony capitalism. Really sad but unsurprising with the current administration.
mullingitover1 day 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.

olalonde1 day 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

ksimukkaabout 21 hours ago
ok, who in the EU is working on our own frontier model? surely we have the drive and ability?
aleccoabout 21 hours ago
EU just shrunk their AI projects and picked a very, very dodgy Italian company who has been burning money with nothing to show.
dansquizsoftabout 18 hours ago
The EU is dead in the water on this front mate...
pembrookabout 20 hours 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.

chinathrowabout 16 hours ago
Begun the AI wars have.
truthbe1 day ago
Open source should create a new license where it specifically doesn't allow release to these "trusted partners".
digitaltreesabout 23 hours 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
sscaryterry1 day ago
I thought Fable was a "safer" Mythos?!
dchftcs1 day ago
I suppose the point is that Mythos was released to a smaller set of partners anyway and Fable is for the masses.
jchook1 day 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."

Advertisement
nozzlegear1 day ago
Wowee, just happens to be on the same day of OpenAI's Sol announcement. How convenient for Dario and Anthropic!
__natty__1 day 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.
Aeolun1 day ago
This should perhaps not be surprising considering the president.
andai1 day ago
Weren't they already doing that?
zacksiri1 day 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

SwellJoe1 day ago
I'll point out that a lot of the current administration and Republican Congress that enables the current administration are Ayn Rand fans.
zacksiri1 day ago
They cherry pick and choose the parts of her work that fits their agenda, while forgetting the other parts.
SwellJoeabout 23 hours ago
Of course. No true Scotsman would ever do such a thing.
WhereIsTheTruthabout 15 hours ago
When will the world retaliate? They have been stealing data globally
Havocabout 16 hours 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.
everyoneabout 15 hours ago
This is just more marketing hype imo.. "omg its sooo good it has to be restricted"
kdawag1 day ago
To the surprise of absolutely nobody following the news
Henchman211 day ago
This is what “stacking the deck” looks like
pertymcpert1 day ago
Why would they allow Mythos but not Fable? Fable is the one with more guardrails.
layer81 day 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.
nozzlegear1 day ago
To quote famed businessman and philosopher Eugene Krabs: "Money."
LoganDarkabout 9 hours ago
The ban was on "Mythos-class models" which unfortunately includes Fable regardless of guardrails.
Advertisement
Havoc1 day 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

jauntywundrkind1 day 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.

wolvoleo1 day 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.
thrwaway551 day 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
wolvoleo1 day ago
But the effects on the industry as a whole are huge, look at the cost of memory, CPUs and GPUs. Many of the companies that make them are not private.
bluecalm1 day ago
They all get serious investments from public companies and a lot of public companies rely on those private labs buying stuff from them.
SpicyLemonZest1 day 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.
bayarearefugee1 day 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.

wewewedxfgdf1 day 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?

Cryptosale75about 23 hours 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.
jraphabout 23 hours ago
Did you mess up your double negation?
brokensegueabout 23 hours ago
You mean neither?
VortexLainabout 17 hours ago
Welcome to the permanent underclass everyone.
globular-toastabout 12 hours ago
So close to making it 250 years before becoming just like UK/Europe...
jimmydoe1 day ago
Congrats sama. Such a great sophisticated 5d chess move.
llelouch1 day ago
Please explain. Do you think Altman wanted this to catch-up?
jimmydoe1 day 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_boiabout 24 hours 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.
micromacrofoot1 day ago
america is worrying about a civil war and missing the corporate takeover
zrn900about 5 hours 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).
acallaghanabout 18 hours ago
When AI bubble pops, no bailouts. I'm not paying for this BS
metaworkers11about 18 hours ago
presumably those targeting Gaza, Lebanon and Iran? more effective genocide. A wonderful two party system we have here.
Advertisement
zuzululu1 day ago
should see 5.6 any day now
standardUser1 day 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.
zsoltkacsandiabout 20 hours ago
And this is how Chinese AI companies will win over the U.S.

Play stupid games win stupid prizes.

aryonoco1 day 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_time1 day ago
Free for me, not for thee!

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

1over1371 day ago
Stop contributing now. Why wait?
wasting_time1 day ago
Claude makes me a 10x better programmer. Giving that up I might as well switch to llama farming.
hmokiguess1 day ago
I identify as a trusted partner, can I have one Mythos please.
xystabout 22 hours ago
"trusted" meaning "paid millions to trump admin slush fund account"
chungus_amongus1 day ago
despicable
enraged_camel1 day ago
@dang can you change it?
paxys1 day 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.
_pdp_about 13 hours ago
Nooice /s
Advertisement
frogperson1 day ago
Who needs freedom of speech anyway? I'm just glad the trump admin is looking out for by best interests. /s
vlian20881 day ago
>Who needs freedom of speech anyway?

I vividly recall that freedom of speech is racist now, so good riddance.

truthbe1 day ago
Sarcasm Detected, -40 Ameripoints have been deducted from your account. Have a nice day!
skywhopper1 day ago
Why post a content free link to Twitter for this?
naturalmovement1 day ago
80% of the irrationally angry comments here have zero clue how export controls work and is giving me serious Dunning Kruger vibes.

Please go read US history before sounding off on this topic. These laws have existed for decades.

gensym1 day ago
Just because a policy is legal doesn't mean it cannot be disastrous.
andsoitis1 day ago
"disastrous" seems hyperbolic to me.

what disaster do you foresee?

gensym1 day ago
Favored companies get access to frontier models, which gives them a competitive advantage, starving out smaller companies. Any smaller companies that do manage to innovate ultimately get acquired by the favored companies since they are worth more with access to frontier models than without (which is effectively a discount on the purchase price of those companies).

I'm not saying that's going to happen, but it is one possible scenario that, over time, would be disastrous for innovation and freedom.

nickthegreek1 day ago
Foreseeable corruption by the state. A further slip into cronyism. A large puzzle piece that when simply connected with the recent actions like demanding shares in companies, removing funding for energy projects not aligned with other lobbies, pardoning of white collar criminals. It seems pretty plain and obvious the type of disasters that await.
Capricorn24811 day ago
I'm not being facetious, can you direct us to which laws are in play here? Specifically, why different models can be classified as different exports that need separate approvals?
naturalmovement1 day ago
Section 5 Part 2 (Information Security) of the EAR Commerce Control List likely applies.

IANAL; you need to be one to interpret this stuff. These laws are as thick as a dictionary.

The EAR dates back to the Export Administration Act of 1979 but it was mostly overhauled by Congress in 2018.