10 ms·

Just to put things in the right perspective to those who are not aware, Amazon heavily invests in Anthropic [0] and AWS is a partner on project Glasswing (Selec

Just to put things in the right perspective to those who are not aware, Amazon heavily invests in Anthropic [0] and AWS is a partner on project Glasswing (Select companies that used Mythos to find critical vulnerabilities in major open source and critical infrastructure) [1] So I don't think there is anything sinister here, I would use Hanlon's razor [2] here... [0] https://www.anthropic.com/news/anthropic-amazon-compute https://www.anthropic.com/news/anthropic-amazon-compute [1] https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/building-ai-defenses-at-scale-before-the-threats-emerge/ https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/building-ai-defenses-a... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor

eikenberry 3mo ago
So you're saying this is being done to benefit Anthropic, giving them that regulatory moat they've been so desperately asking for... This could give them that slowdown in model training that they need to be profitable.
fny 3mo ago
To give you further perspective, Amazon has a $50B stake in OpenAI and a $5B stake in Anthropic. If things were flipped, I highly doubt Amazon would be running straight to the feds.
- tims33 3mo ago
  $50B is <2% of Amazon's market cap. There is no reason to believe the difference in the two investments drove this disclosure.
- eranation 3mo ago
  Interesting point. Just a small correction, the Anthropic stake is higher. ($13B + another $20B option if they hit certain milestones, which I believe is almost guaranteed) So it's closer to $33B In any case, there is no reason for them to purposefully hurt Anthropic. I would say that this government "takedown" of Mythos is great free advertising. I mean, if you look at this, they said it's too risky to launch, we all said it's pure marketing, and now when it's actually "banned" for being too risky, we laugh at the "Karma", where in fact, the majority of people who are not in our circles, see it as "wow, they were not kidding". The overall result is net gain in brand awareness to Anthropic, before an IPO, I think if we had 2 parallel universes with or without this ban, the one with is a much higher IPO outcome for Anthropic than the other. And again, I think this all needs to be taken with Occam's razor and bit of Hanlon's razor (without going into politics, the technical savviness of this administration is not the thing it's most famous for)
  - bilbo-b-baggins 3mo ago
    You seem to assume rational actors. Bezos et. al. are definitely not that.
    - root_axis 3mo ago
      How is Bezos not rational?
    - LordDragonfang 3mo ago
      There are a number of CEOs that I would be willing to label as not being rational actors. Bezos would not typically make that list.
  - swyx 3mo ago
    > the technical savviness of this administration is not the thing it's most famous for you cast aspersions here but honestly name one in the last 50 years that is more tech literate
    - no-name-here 3mo ago
      Isn’t Trump’s Science and Technology Advisors Council pretty much entirely made up of Trump donors, rich investors, and/or cryptocurrency CEOs, whereas pretty much every other president included legitimate science and technology advisors on it? (I last checked 2 or 3 months ago.)
  - thewebguyd 3mo ago
    > I would say that this government "takedown" of Mythos is great free advertising. Apple did the same thing with the PowerMac G4 when it was temporarily afoul of export control laws as it surpassed 1 gigaflop, ran an ad "for the first time in history a personal computer has been classified as a weapon" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lb7EhYy-2RE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lb7EhYy-2RE)
  - btown 3mo ago
    There's even more to this - because among the possible outcomes is one where Fable is only made available to enterprises that have gone through Know Your Customer (KYC) processes, and perhaps only to verified users of those companies, and perhaps requiring biometrics and attribution so government can know who was using that account. Now, say you don't want to sign a pre-committed enterprise contract with Anthropic. But oh, you already have such a contract with AWS, and they'll let you use any model you want, and they've implemented KYC and will graciously connect you with a solutions partner who can help you with the IAM systems integrations for key tracking and attribution. Oh, and all these enterprise contracts will bill by token. We're not talking a small stake in a company selling subscriptions, we're talking immediate revenue at four-figure-per-user levels, and pushing more and more companies to see that as "just part of their AWS bill." This is worth a significant amount of money to AWS. So the question is: does Hanlon's Razor apply when a $2.5 trillion company is putting its best minds into how to engineer strategic outcomes? The regulatory capture angle here is, if anything, an implementation detail.
- gordonhart 3mo ago
  Amazon is thought to own 15-20% of Anthropic which as a company has a valuation of>$1T. Amazon’s stake is probably closer to $200B
- optimalsolver 3mo ago
  No, $5B is the amount they put into Anthropic earlier this year, but that's in addition to $8B already invested. Also, $50B is not Amazon's current stake in OpenAI, it's what they've agreed to invest. By that measure, Amazon's stake in Anthropic is in the tens of billions. https://www.cnbc.com/2026/04/20/amazon-invest-up-to-25-billion-in-anthropic-part-of-ai-infrastructure.html https://www.cnbc.com/2026/04/20/amazon-invest-up-to-25-billi...
Chance-Device 3mo ago
Or in my favourite formulation: “Never assume conspiracy where mere incompetence will do”.
- grodriguez100 3mo ago
  Hanlon’s razor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor
  - amelius 3mo ago
    Note that people can also abuse it as a tactic.
  - QuadmasterXLII 3mo ago
    Hanlons razor has fucked us, voters tolerate unlimited malice as long as the politicians can demonstrate they are genuinely incompetent
- polishTar 3mo ago
  The people of hacker news seem to really want this to be some sort of conspiracy. It's quite interesting to see. "It's deliberate sabotage by Amazon", "It's retribution by Hegseth for embarrassing the DoW", "It's a brilliant marketing scheme by Anthropic", "It's because of the govt is considering investing in OpenAI and so they're crippling any competitors". It's never just "a very poorly formed regulatory action in response to increasingly capable models".
  - ray_kay777 3mo ago
    In fairness, this tweet makes it seem very much like it's retribution from Hegseth: https://xcancel.com/PeteHegseth/status/2065897156226015690#m https://xcancel.com/PeteHegseth/status/2065897156226015690#m
- qsera 3mo ago
  And mine "You can be incompetent and become the POTUS twice!"
Eridrus 3mo ago
The commentary sounds like AWS really pushed this. If you're bringing this sort of stuff to the government, it's because you want the government to act...

eikenberry 3mo ago

So you're saying this is being done to benefit Anthropic, giving them that regulatory moat they've been so desperately asking for... This could give them that slowdown in model training that they need to be profitable.

fny 3mo ago

To give you further perspective, Amazon has a $50B stake in OpenAI and a $5B stake in Anthropic. If things were flipped, I highly doubt Amazon would be running straight to the feds.

tims33 3mo ago
$50B is <2% of Amazon's market cap. There is no reason to believe the difference in the two investments drove this disclosure.
eranation 3mo ago
Interesting point. Just a small correction, the Anthropic stake is higher. ($13B + another $20B option if they hit certain milestones, which I believe is almost guaranteed) So it's closer to $33B In any case, there is no reason for them to purposefully hurt Anthropic. I would say that this government "takedown" of Mythos is great free advertising. I mean, if you look at this, they said it's too risky to launch, we all said it's pure marketing, and now when it's actually "banned" for being too risky, we laugh at the "Karma", where in fact, the majority of people who are not in our circles, see it as "wow, they were not kidding". The overall result is net gain in brand awareness to Anthropic, before an IPO, I think if we had 2 parallel universes with or without this ban, the one with is a much higher IPO outcome for Anthropic than the other. And again, I think this all needs to be taken with Occam's razor and bit of Hanlon's razor (without going into politics, the technical savviness of this administration is not the thing it's most famous for)
- bilbo-b-baggins 3mo ago
  You seem to assume rational actors. Bezos et. al. are definitely not that.
  - root_axis 3mo ago
    How is Bezos not rational?
  - LordDragonfang 3mo ago
    There are a number of CEOs that I would be willing to label as not being rational actors. Bezos would not typically make that list.
- swyx 3mo ago
  > the technical savviness of this administration is not the thing it's most famous for you cast aspersions here but honestly name one in the last 50 years that is more tech literate
  - no-name-here 3mo ago
    Isn’t Trump’s Science and Technology Advisors Council pretty much entirely made up of Trump donors, rich investors, and/or cryptocurrency CEOs, whereas pretty much every other president included legitimate science and technology advisors on it? (I last checked 2 or 3 months ago.)
- thewebguyd 3mo ago
  > I would say that this government "takedown" of Mythos is great free advertising. Apple did the same thing with the PowerMac G4 when it was temporarily afoul of export control laws as it surpassed 1 gigaflop, ran an ad "for the first time in history a personal computer has been classified as a weapon" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lb7EhYy-2RE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lb7EhYy-2RE)
- btown 3mo ago
  There's even more to this - because among the possible outcomes is one where Fable is only made available to enterprises that have gone through Know Your Customer (KYC) processes, and perhaps only to verified users of those companies, and perhaps requiring biometrics and attribution so government can know who was using that account. Now, say you don't want to sign a pre-committed enterprise contract with Anthropic. But oh, you already have such a contract with AWS, and they'll let you use any model you want, and they've implemented KYC and will graciously connect you with a solutions partner who can help you with the IAM systems integrations for key tracking and attribution. Oh, and all these enterprise contracts will bill by token. We're not talking a small stake in a company selling subscriptions, we're talking immediate revenue at four-figure-per-user levels, and pushing more and more companies to see that as "just part of their AWS bill." This is worth a significant amount of money to AWS. So the question is: does Hanlon's Razor apply when a $2.5 trillion company is putting its best minds into how to engineer strategic outcomes? The regulatory capture angle here is, if anything, an implementation detail.
gordonhart 3mo ago
Amazon is thought to own 15-20% of Anthropic which as a company has a valuation of>$1T. Amazon’s stake is probably closer to $200B
optimalsolver 3mo ago
No, $5B is the amount they put into Anthropic earlier this year, but that's in addition to $8B already invested. Also, $50B is not Amazon's current stake in OpenAI, it's what they've agreed to invest. By that measure, Amazon's stake in Anthropic is in the tens of billions. https://www.cnbc.com/2026/04/20/amazon-invest-up-to-25-billion-in-anthropic-part-of-ai-infrastructure.html https://www.cnbc.com/2026/04/20/amazon-invest-up-to-25-billi...

Chance-Device 3mo ago

Or in my favourite formulation: “Never assume conspiracy where mere incompetence will do”.

grodriguez100 3mo ago
Hanlon’s razor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor
- amelius 3mo ago
  Note that people can also abuse it as a tactic.
- QuadmasterXLII 3mo ago
  Hanlons razor has fucked us, voters tolerate unlimited malice as long as the politicians can demonstrate they are genuinely incompetent
polishTar 3mo ago
The people of hacker news seem to really want this to be some sort of conspiracy. It's quite interesting to see. "It's deliberate sabotage by Amazon", "It's retribution by Hegseth for embarrassing the DoW", "It's a brilliant marketing scheme by Anthropic", "It's because of the govt is considering investing in OpenAI and so they're crippling any competitors". It's never just "a very poorly formed regulatory action in response to increasingly capable models".
- ray_kay777 3mo ago
  In fairness, this tweet makes it seem very much like it's retribution from Hegseth: https://xcancel.com/PeteHegseth/status/2065897156226015690#m https://xcancel.com/PeteHegseth/status/2065897156226015690#m
qsera 3mo ago
And mine "You can be incompetent and become the POTUS twice!"

Eridrus 3mo ago

The commentary sounds like AWS really pushed this. If you're bringing this sort of stuff to the government, it's because you want the government to act...