21 ms·

U.S. government will decide who gets to use GPT-5.6

• kleiba2 3mo ago
  "...and the land of the free!"
• obilgic 3mo ago
  related: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/brief-history-book-burning-printing-press-internet-archives-180964697/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/brief-history-book-bu...
• simplesocieties 3mo ago
  Cyberpunk 2077 is such an accurate picture of the future. Megacorps will own and control everything, we will be lucky to get the leftover scraps.
  • orbital-decay 3mo ago
    CP 2077 belongs to a 80s franchise, it was futuristic back then. Since the 2000s, cyberpunk the 80's genre is an accurate representation of the present and past. The future looks bleaker now, with fewer romanticized decorations like flying cars and social dynamics being worse than what the cyberpunk grandfathers imagined. For example "low life" being way more controlled which is exactly what both masses and elites wanted. In retrospect it's obvious that the cyberpunk authors were mistakenly projecting certain parts of their present into the future (relative freedom of the masses and increasing rate of "traditional" engineering), and didn't consider second order effects and political action/reaction.
• Freedumbs 3mo ago
  Gotta say, I'm really annoyed that the corruption of the government is directly responsible for what new toys I'm allowed to play with.
• m3kw9 3mo ago
  Just don't say shit like it's gonna overtake the gov't systems and world, Dario.
• unreal37 3mo ago
  I believe OpenAI actually wanted their next model to be seen as a potential cybersecurity threat because they were jealous that Mythos got that label
• dwa3592 3mo ago
  This will be a thing of the past sooner than you expect.
• digitaltrees 3mo ago
  Open source is looking great right now
  • verdverm 3mo ago
    seriously, ordered more hardware this week, as it gets more dystopian every week wondering when more people will raise their voice and get engaged
    • King-Aaron 3mo ago
      History shows that people generally start speaking out about things after it's too late to do so.
      • thewebguyd 3mo ago
        More specifically, the masses here are well satisfied with proverbial bread and circuses. We won't see mass action until enough people have literally nothing left to lose. For now, folks have plenty to risk and lose by taking action. There is not nearly enough homelessness or starvation yet for people to rise up. The masses are surprisingly tolerant of authoritarian oppression so long as food can keep being put on the table.
        • verdverm 3mo ago
          On a bright note, there are signs of bipartisan anger at government and corruption. This needs to be channeled effectively by the people instead of the powerful or politicians. The key is to connect the problems to the corruption, many already see it this way. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/americans-are-furious-about-corruption https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/amer... the many can defeat the money
  • hdgvhicv 3mo ago
    It’s looking very fragile from a legal point of view. Ownership of compute and software freedom will be next k the chopping block after control of networks that’s occurring at the moment.
• vkaku 3mo ago
  Keep your **** models to yourselves.... the world really has moved on to open models which can give you good enough results at a fraction of the cost and zero BS licensing.
  • selcuka 3mo ago
    > the world really has moved on to open models Don't get me wrong: I'm all for open models, but I think it will get more and more difficult to distil-train them without (legitimate) access to frontier models.
    • thiago_fm 3mo ago
      As if all progress done in open models is because of distilling... People have no idea and everybody pretends to be an expert and ignore how good China is on AI research
    • krustyvonklown 3mo ago
      Personally, I find it rather humorous that we've moved from the fear that AI generated output would corrupt training to the idea that it is essential to training. Reality itself has not just a left bias but a bias to fundamentals. Bootstrap from fundamentals without introducing arbitrary error and you have the superior system; it just may not be highly compatible with a trash ecosystem.
      • dminik 3mo ago
        I mean, I'm not sure that's the correct read on this. If you want an Opus class model, it makes sense that you would train on what Opus outputs. But, if you want something better than Opus, training on the same data that Opus was trained on with the same architecture will only result in an Opus class model. Then, if your dataset also contains Opus outputs, many of which are wrong, then it makes sense that the model would have reduced performance. All this to say that I don't think there's such a thing as a "Model Collapse," but there likely is a "Model Stagnation."
• quantumwoke 3mo ago
  This is for the preview period, but it's not a good sign. Opus 4.8 may be the last frontier model available to the masses...
  • small_model 3mo ago
    Yes, we will get a crippled version of Mythos, 5.6 and future models, while the chosen few will have unfettered access.
  • jb_briant 3mo ago
    If it's the case then software engineers still have the same place as pre-ClaudeCode era, because 4.8 and 5.5 are damn good at algo but notoriously bad at architecture and coordination.
  • cherryteastain 3mo ago
    From US companies that is.
  • 15155 3mo ago
    Thousands of American engineers all over the country (most of whom probably aren't on Hacker News) work with ITAR/EAR-regulated software and hardware every single day: these regulations are really not difficult to abide if you're a citizen.
    • quantumwoke 3mo ago
      And what about the rest of the world? I can't imagine US partners will abide this for long.
      • 15155 3mo ago
        They get the dual-use scraps or whatever China is hawking. Being told "no" is never fun, but the regulations are not hard to comply with (despite what Anthropic might have you believe.) > I can't imagine US partners will abide this for long. What are they going to do? Start their own Anthropic? Go for it. Why is every other country in the world entitled to American technology by default?
• vindex10 3mo ago
  Source: https://www.reuters.com/business/trump-administration-asks-openai-stagger-release-new-model-information-reports-2026-06-25/ https://www.reuters.com/business/trump-administration-asks-o...
  • deleted 3mo ago
    [deleted]
• deleted 3mo ago
  [deleted]
• OkWing99 3mo ago
  Why do I get the feeling the administration is doing this to buy a position in the AI companies before they go public. If non US citizens shouldn't have the models - wouldn't that cause both Anthropic and OAI to fire non-citizens?
  • saidnooneever 3mo ago
    because the administration has been repeating the same patterns over pretty much its entire existence. Dont worry though, the rest of the entire world gets access to better chinese models :-), once they get a taste for those the US has lost their little trade game and the future truly belongs to China. Its almost like they are serving it up on a silver platter. ofc they are not, they are just betting all in their models will be better, which is unlikely. (just look at the chinese law and all the names atop of advanced AI papers...)
  • 15155 3mo ago
    > wouldn't that cause both Anthropic and OAI to fire non-citizens? They would do what the thousands of other companies do with their tens of thousands of engineers handling ITAR/EAR-regulated software/hardware every day: compartmentalize their workforces, buildings, and access.
• RickS 3mo ago
  US citizens to remain nonviolent at any cost, issue strongly worded internet comments, and find themselves a little less free every day.
  • zigman1 3mo ago
    While laughing at the stereotype of French being on the street all the time
    • sscaryterry 3mo ago
      I do respect the French. They've proven, time and time again, that if you fuck with the people, heads will roll...
      • zzgo 3mo ago
        Meanwhile, I draw a three day suspension every time I post the word "guillotine" on Reddit.
  • baq 3mo ago
    The onion finds itself in a peculiar spot today
    • classified 3mo ago
      How do they do it? Is it even still possible to make up stories that sound more absurd than reality?
  • apexalpha 3mo ago
    Hey some of them take an entire Saturday off to go to a family friendly demonstration holding witty signs in front of their state capitol!
    • xtracto 3mo ago
      Watch out, ive read that the US government has incarcerated people for about 50 years for doing that.
• NooneAtAll3 3mo ago
  "government needs to step in and regulate ai" "wait, not like that"
  • margorczynski 3mo ago
    Anth/OpenAI simply wanted the government to pull the ladder after them and ban models from China. Seems it blew in their faces and probably the new frontier models will be available only to a select few. Many people predicted this, only a naive person would believe that access to something with these capabilities would be decided by some dude in California.
    • matheusmoreira 3mo ago
      As entertaining as the sheer Schadenfreude of the situation is, this is terrible for foreign peasants like myself. It no longer makes any sense to pay for America's frontier AI models. I'd be funding the training of models I will never be able to use. GLM 5.2 is competitive with Opus 4.6. If the best model I'll ever get is Opus 4.8, then the choice is clear. I'll miss Opus.
      • margorczynski 3mo ago
        The geopolitical angle of all of this is interesting. Will countries, especially bigger players really just hope they'll get access to something so crucial from the US or China? Probably the EU could pool together funds to create something competitive as being on the mercy of someone else isn't a pleasant place to be. And I wouldn't get so used to the open models. Eventually, if they get good enough, the access to them will also get restricted.
        • matheusmoreira 3mo ago
          The plan is to buy hardware before that can happen.
  • dontreact 3mo ago
    Imagine if someone was lobbying for some reasonable regulation (we should regulate drugs, based around clinical trials) and then instead of a transparent system you get purely executive actions with little to no public justification (Trump declares all glp1s illegal no one knows why exactly) Would you levy the same two quote criticism of the reasonable call for regulation?
• dude250711 3mo ago
  So, that DeepSeek thing, you are saying it's not that bad?
  • InsideOutSanta 3mo ago
    GLM-5.2 is currently the best open-weight model for development. It's not as good as the current American SOTA models, but if you wrote code with US SOTA models four months ago, you can write code with GLM-5.2 today. DeepSeek 4 is a good model for many tasks, but I think it currently lacks the post-training required to become a genuinely great coding model.
• sandworm101 3mo ago
  This will be exactly as effective as the BBC's efforts to ensure only UK taxpayers are allowed to stream Doctor Who from BBC servers on Christmas morning.
• bilekas 3mo ago
  Wow.. Okay so it's official now that the playbook is "we will try to prevent anyone who we don't like to use advanced tech". I understand if its military hardware and software, that's the property of the US government however this is the property of a private company.. Now seemingly being commandeered and issued at the will of the government, sounds very Russian/Chinese to me. Is there a precedent for this before in a democratic country ?
  • PunchyHamster 3mo ago
    That was always the playbook > Is there a precedent for this before in a democratic country ? I'd argue US is not very democratic country given how many of what govt does goes against people's wishes. Same as UK
    • bilekas 3mo ago
      > I'd argue US is not very democratic country given how many of what govt does goes against people's wishes. Same as UK That could be argued but the core principle is freedom of commerce and private companies get a lot of runway. This seems completely counter to tha.
      • testfrequency 3mo ago
        The UK is a lot more compassionate about people’s wishes, it’s not nearly as bureaucratic and polarizing “democracy” as the US. Laws in the UK are passed quickly, and feedback is always considered. Whether you agree or not on the regulation is another discussion.
        • 15155 3mo ago
          > Laws in the UK are passed quickly Is that a feature or a bug?
          • testfrequency 3mo ago
            Depends on how pessimistic you are I suppose.
• testfrequency 3mo ago
  +1 point to China! In all seriousness, I can’t believe the AI firms are abiding by this peacefully. If I truly loved my company, and I felt we were on the bleeding edge of incredible, life changing products, why would I allow my company to be set up for failure by remaining somewhere that clearly wants control over the sovereignty. The US gov sees these AI companies as bartering power, not as innovation. Wouldn’t you as a parent always want what’s best for your child, not for yourself? It also feels like they can’t just relocate out of the country, as the administration will surely sanction anyone from business within the country again. These firms are so over inflated with evaluations and opex, they’ve dug themselves into a corner. This is not to say regulation does not exist in any other country, but it’s clear now after what’s happening at Anthropic + OAI that the US gov has taken these companies hostage. This is only further playing into the hands of open source and the outside models; the US gov is going to be to blame for when they all lose the race to low cost/free.
  • matheusmoreira 3mo ago
    > I can’t believe the AI firms are abiding by this peacefully. They literally asked for this.
  • ElProlactin 3mo ago
    > +1 point to China! Which, like the US, uses export controls when it finds them advantageous: https://nam.org/china-imposes-export-controls-on-u-s-minerals-defense-firms/ https://nam.org/china-imposes-export-controls-on-u-s-mineral... > In all seriousness, I can’t believe the AI firms are abiding by this peacefully. If I truly loved my company, and I felt we were on the bleeding edge of incredible, life changing products, why would I allow my company to be set up for failure by remaining somewhere that clearly wants control over my sovereignty. So, locate in China, where every company of importance is essentially required in practice to maintain ties to the CCP? I personally think the US has gone too far with its use of export controls and sanctions as a political tool, but it's foolish to believe that it's different anywhere else on the planet. In China, it has even been reported that top AI talent is restricted from overseas travel. https://www.thinkchina.sg/technology/china-tightens-control-over-ai-experts-private-firms-will-backfire https://www.thinkchina.sg/technology/china-tightens-control-... Bottom line: if you're working on cutting-edge technology that is deemed to be of critical national security importance and has military or dual use implications, you're going to be a hostage no matter where you go.
• wewewedxfgdf 3mo ago
  Remember how China turned its tech industry into a smoking ruin - make making them all submit to political priorities: Ant Group: China halted Ant’s IPO and forced a restructuring Alibaba: China fined and politically disciplined Alibaba Didi: China punished Didi after its US listing by removing its apps, freezing users, forcing delisting Tutoring platforms: banned profit from core school-subject tutoring. Tencent gaming: restricted youth gaming froze approvals NetEase and gaming companies: licence freeze stopped game companies from shipping games. Meituan: fined Meituan and forced changes to its labour and platform model. Huya/DouYu: blocked Tencent’s game-streaming merger, stopping commercial consolidation in a major entertainment market. Boss Zhipin / Full Truck Alliance: froze new users after listging in the US Crypto companbies: banned crypto trading and mining, forcing exchanges offshore. Think it's not happening to the US? tourism - people afraid to visit tariffs - wrecking ball to all businesses defence - why would anyone buy US weapons after Greenland and Canada internet clouds - Greenland made Europe decide that the US clouds can't be trusted, now sovereign computing matters and MS/AWS/Google are feeling it finance - no one trusts the US not to turn people into "non members of global society" by banning them from visa and credit card and banking systems
  • watwut 3mo ago
    China tech industry is smoking ruin? On what planet are you living?
    • deleted 3mo ago
      [deleted]
    • wewewedxfgdf 3mo ago
      Tech crackdowns rid China of entrepreneurial capitalism https://eastasiaforum.org/2023/09/12/tech-crackdowns-rid-china-of-entrepreneurial-capitalism/ https://eastasiaforum.org/2023/09/12/tech-crackdowns-rid-chi... Why China crushed its tech giants https://www.wired.com/story/china-tech-giants-policy/ https://www.wired.com/story/china-tech-giants-policy/ Why Big Tech May Never Recover in China https://time.com/6973119/china-big-tech-crackdown-backfiring/ https://time.com/6973119/china-big-tech-crackdown-backfiring... Beijing can’t afford another crackdown on its tech companies https://www.cnbc.com/2026/03/11/china-cant-afford-another-crackdown-on-its-tech-companies.html https://www.cnbc.com/2026/03/11/china-cant-afford-another-cr...
• iLoveOncall 3mo ago
  Thanks to the US government for helping kill Anthropic and OpenAI by preventing them from recouping any R&D money from new models. Doing god's work.
• piokoch 3mo ago
  One more wake up call for anyone outside USA, especially Europe. AI will be weaponized, on the battle ground too, but the bigger battle will be fought in the industry competition. Those who have access to state of the art models will have advantage over those who does not. Hopefully open-weight models will catch up, hopefully we, as the people, engineers will find the way to maintain those open-weight models on pair with the closed ones. I try to be optimistic, as we won some battles, against all odds, Linux is flourishing, open source solutions are mainstream.
  • pu_pe 3mo ago
    Europe is in the worst spot right now, because even if open source is the future, there is not enough European-owned datacenters even for inference. Not to mention that China could pull the rug on these models at any moment just like the US did.
    • villish 3mo ago
      Europe has to play both sides for now. There will come a point where both China and the US close off access to the best models. And then what does the EU do?
  • yread 3mo ago
    There are some steps in the good direction: https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/commission-selects-europa-consortium-winner-frontier-ai-grand-challenge-project-build-european-open https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/commission-sel... A consortium will train a 400B-class model and get 2.5% on time of the EuroHPC infrastructure (~2000 PFLOPS datacenters). So, even if the Chinese take away the open source there will be some models. Probably not Mythos quality yet though.
    • redrove 3mo ago
      I’m sorry but I can’t take a European Commission link seriously about training SOTA LLMs.
• deleted 3mo ago
  [deleted]
• thegabriele 3mo ago
  In a scenario where some breakthrough in fusion energy will be discovered I envision: - instant, total world war if it's not coming from USA - let's finish all oil's reserve first otherwise
• sscaryterry 3mo ago
  This will be the end of the US's short-lived AI supremacy. OpenAI and Anthropic are already wildly unprofitable, cutting off the world-wide income stream is just fucking bad business.
  • InsideOutSanta 3mo ago
    Don't worry, their pals in the government will bail them out. But it is odd that this administration has learned absolutely nothing about the mid- to long-term effects of export restrictions on other countries' ability to compete with the US.
    • sscaryterry 3mo ago
      You mean pension funds will bail them out after they IPO? :)
    • rvba 3mo ago
      Mid and long term effects will come with next administration - which can be blamed for the failure (even if it has nothing to do with it) -> so those who caused the problem can be voted back to power.
    • iamnothere 3mo ago
      > bail them out You misspelled “nationalize them” (while we privatize Social Security and probably Medicare) Only the bad parts of capitalism, only the bad parts of socialism. This is what policy looks like in the 2020s.
• SkitterKherpi 3mo ago
  So them banning Fable for only non-Americans is what we non-Americans should expect to be the norm going forward? Way to build even more resentment abroad. I'm very pro-west, but at this point okay, I guess the rest of us have to side with China, not because we remotely like it, but because they don't try to be quite so antagonistic to us in everything they do.
  • automatic6131 3mo ago
    >because they don't try to be quite so antagonistic to us in everything they do. Just because the many headed dragon is trying to bite your sailors' heads doesn't mean you should pilot your ship into the whirlpool
    • dtj1123 3mo ago
      I couldn't have put it better myself.
    • surgical_fire 3mo ago
      Eh, China is much less a threat than the US.
  • wood_spirit 3mo ago
    Expect the US to sanction non-US-controlled models and put sanctions on individuals, companies and countries that use them? They already do this with other things like oil.
    • 15155 3mo ago
      Can you cite any examples of a US citizen being sanctioned for importing foreign technology (not exporting)? Please don't cite anything OFAC-related, it does not apply here.
    • greyface- 3mo ago
      Oil isn't made out of information and cannot be transmitted via a speech act.
• pu_pe 3mo ago
  Without access to leading models, I think open source LLM development will also slow down. I'm not sure which portion of their success right now is due to RLAF and distillation but it's certainly not zero.
• sonink 3mo ago
  There is an assumption that everyone is making here - that China will not do the same. It is entirely possible, that China restricts their frontier models - as and when they are developed - to only Chinese citizens. And India follows along. IMO AI is different from everything else. It is a weapon as potent as nuclear. It is only natural that it be treated as one.
  • 217 3mo ago
    im crying bro snuck in india
  • halJordan 3mo ago
    China already restricts ai models in China. Every model is already submitted to the prc for approval. The us is a follower here
• spacebacon 3mo ago
  [dead]
• akmarinov 3mo ago
  Sooo both OpenAI and Anthropic going bankrupt soon? If they can’t freely sell access to their models and Chinese models catch up to Opus 4.8/GPT 5.5 in 6-8 months - then why pay OAI/Anthropic at all?
  • laichzeit0 3mo ago
    Basically the signal is that the total market for any US AI company is capped at however big the US market is. As non-US AI converges to Opus 4.8 level parity, whatever is still non-US consumer base shrinks towards zero.
  • matheusmoreira 3mo ago
    Worse: we'd be paying US companies to train models we'll never be able to use.
  • samuelknight 3mo ago
    It will be much harder for Chinese models to close the gap than it is to keep the historical 6-9 months behind. Their models' performance are heavily propped up on distillation runs. The capital going to their frontier labs is 10x-100x smaller than US frontier labs.
    • akmarinov 3mo ago
      Harder, but they’ll get access one way or another. And once on par - it’s game over
  • stackedinserter 3mo ago
    How many people are going to buy a $10-20K rigs to run these open models?
    • andrewchambers 3mo ago
      Small businesses can easily buy them.
    • general1465 3mo ago
• deleted 3mo ago
  [deleted]
• I_am_tiberius 3mo ago
  This post isn't even on the landing page for some reason.
  • keyle 3mo ago
    It's called ghosted, shadow banned, too sensitive / shitshow; Basically a multiplier of 0.1 is added to this post's ranking, or similar, and it will need thousands of upvote instead of hundreds to show. It's commonly applied silently to posts that simply don't look good or become a nightmare to manage the narrative of. It's a healthy way to manage a community while looking transparent. I think it's sucky and cheap, but at the same time it's also the best solution.
    • I_am_tiberius 3mo ago
      If they do it, they should mark the post as such as give an explanation. Otherwise you never know if uncle "Sam" called and asked it to be treated as such.
      • 4k93n2 3mo ago
        no point really. if someone was forcing them to take this off the front page then they would probably just tell them to add that explanation to the thread as well
• ChrisArchitect 3mo ago
  Please avoid reddit posts of screenshots of articles OP. [dupe] Earlier discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48678789 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48678789
• ChrisArchitect 3mo ago
  Related: OpenAI Leans Toward Waiting Until Next Year for IPO https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48678873 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48678873
• IAmGraydon 3mo ago
  Of course the idiots in Washington have bought the hype - hook, line, and sinker.
  • derwiki 3mo ago
    The party in power is known for being pro-regulation so it makes sense /s
• duxup 3mo ago
  Just seems like gatekeeping for graft and favors / corruption.
• revolvingthrow 3mo ago
  This is a real head scratcher. Unless this is a very short term action it seems to have only downsides for everybody: - people pay much more for US models than Chinese models because right now they're the best. Once they're no longer the best (since you don't get access to them) why would anyone pay several times as much for the same result? - once you get a high amount of tokens flowing into China instead of US companies, they will train on those chats and their rate of improvement will only accelerate, making US models even less attractive over time - the sky-high IPO are dead in the water, since their story of "we will replace a good chunk of all knowledge work in the world, capturing a few % of total global spend relating to it" turns into "we will make a bunch of money out of a few dozen S&P 500 paying for the best, and some pocket money out of whoever uses our overpriced models that are as good as Chinese models" - far less money overall. Losing access to untold billions of investor money certainly won't improve performance for the US labs - all the non-US people start asking themselves why they're funneling money to US corporations who barely share any of the secret sauce compared to Chinese corporations who share plenty when it comes to LLM, including the models themselves (at least for now) - Chinese models have significantly less guardrails, making for better end-user experience - there is a small but non-zero chance Euros get off their asses and invest into AI, making something halfway decent and further fracturing the market which cuts into US profits So what's the benefit here? I thought the Mythos situation was the current admin taking revenge on Antrophic for not kissing the ring, or simply looking for a bribe, but no matter which way I look at it it's a self-own. The only way this would make any sense is if AGI is imminent, which I don't think even the boosters are arguing at this point. Theoretically US could outlaw Chinese models, but I'm not sure what it's supposed to accomplish as the rest of the world certainly won't, especially as long as they release open weights models that you can run without phoning home.
  • tencentshill 3mo ago
    You have thought about this longer than anyone who made the decision. Stop caring, it only makes your head hurt.
  • jliptzin 3mo ago
    Yea not sure who would put money into an OpenAI or Anthropic IPO at this point. After this episode I promptly bought the hardware I needed to run local models (~$25k) and am extremely impressed. The price tag alone is worth the peace of mind knowing I will always have a locally running LLM that nobody can take away. I don't need Mythos-level intelligence to do 99% of my day to day work; Opus 4.8 was more than enough and I am pretty close to that with the open source models. So what happens when this hardware inevitably gets cheaper and cheaper and people realize they can run the models they actually need locally and without handing all their data over to these companies? Only if you're doing cutting edge research or some highly, highly niche project would you need the frontier models.
• type4 3mo ago
  Great, so when do we lowly code-serfs get access to it?
  • davidwritesbugs 3mo ago
    Shutup peasant, you'll get it when we say. And be grateful.
    • justShane 3mo ago
      Mythos, go hack the new OpenAI model for me. Hey OpenAI model go hack the new mythos for me. Battle bots, oppression version.
  • paxys 3mo ago
    How much are you able to contribute to Trump’s election fund?
  • tedsanders 3mo ago
    Unfortunately we're not in a position where we can promise an exact date, but we expect it to take weeks (not days or months). It's the best coding model we've ever trained and we're bummed we can't release it to everyone yet. When we do launch, we'll share a lot more evals and testimonials and demos that help show what it's good/bad at. Personally hoping that both GPT-5.6 Sol and Fable 5 get broadly released soon so that everyone (myself included) can try them head to head. (I work at OpenAI.)
    • I_am_tiberius 3mo ago
      You don't have to mention details, but is it internally a topic that your CEO hasn't even publicly criticized the Anthropic model freeze and are open ai folks seeing through the Musk/xai game that is in play here?
      • senordevnyc 3mo ago
        Pretty pointless question to ask someone posting here under their own name
• Fraterkes 3mo ago
  "We believe in broad access, and we plan to make GPT‑5.6 Sol, Terra, and Luna generally available in the coming weeks. As part of our ongoing engagement with the U.S. government, we previewed our plans and the models’ capabilities ahead of today’s launch. At their request, we are starting with a limited preview for a small group of trusted partners whose participation has been shared with the government, before releasing more broadly. During this preview, we will continue testing and coordinating closely with partners as we work toward broader availability. We don’t believe this kind of government access process should become the long-term default. It keeps the best tools from users, developers, enterprises, cyber defenders, and global partners who need them. We are taking this short-term step because we believe it is the strongest path to broader availability in the coming weeks, while we work with the Administration to develop the cyber Executive Order framework and a repeatable process for future model releases." This amount of courting the current administration is pretty scary imo.
  • lend000 3mo ago
    Anthropic's fear-mongering and marketing is the reason we have these restrictions in the first place. Despite their virtue signaling, Anthropic is the only major lab that has never released an open weights model, has been caught intentionally nerfing a model after release (Opus 4.6), intentionally and silently degrades performance for suspected competitors and AI researchers, complains incessantly about distillation when everyone is doing it (and after they settled for pirating books), and wants to pull the ladder out from everyone trying to catch up. They're anti-consumer and only concerned with holding the power themselves. I'm not a fan of Altman, but Anthropic is the worst actor in the space, and I hope they lose.
    • tiahura 3mo ago
      What about openai's fear mongering, or googles, or JP Morgans, or Frank Herbert's, or Arthur C. Clarke's or Samuel Butler's? If you can't envision plausible scenarios where very bad things happen because of a malevolent actor, ChatGPT 6, and a little bad luck - you need to think harder.
• pixelpoet 3mo ago
  Are these models still relevant for people outside the US? I get the impression we're stuck on GPT 5.5 and Opus 4.8 pretty much permanently now, and relying on Chinese models in future.
  • cryo32 3mo ago
    You shouldn’t build a business that relies on any of these models. It’s a geopolitical and sovereignty risk now. Someone could just rug pull your entire stack.
  • seviu 3mo ago
    Dont worry, chinese models will distill frontier ones, quite fast. The excuse they give is borderline childish. I get the thing about slow rollout, make sure partners get to fix the bugs, etc... But bad actors are hard working motivated entities with tens of thousand of fake ids, and american citizens working for them, for pennies. All while the ones like or you sit at a crossfire which is borderline useless. I cant wait to see what Qwen did with the massive distillation they made out of Opus 4.8 and Fable aka Mythos aka pretty sure they jailbroke it.
    • 15155 3mo ago
      This is nothing a few felony indictments can't fix.
      • bloppe 3mo ago
        Pretty sure Chinese police will not cooperate with a US indictment
        • 15155 3mo ago
          No, but the Americans facilitating their access sure as hell will.
          • Sammi 3mo ago
• razighter777 3mo ago
  I hope this doesn't become the new norm where government becomes the bottleneck for innovation in the AI space. It's worrying that with no formal and transparent policy framework that the government will be picking winners and losers and stifling innovation. There's been no public policy, executive order, legislation, or otherwise on this, I wonder if anyone has filed FOIA requests for these decisions or the conversations between the Executive Branch and AI companies.
  • vidarh 3mo ago
    It will just mean US providers will rapidly loose their moat. Their moat is already shrinking. If they can't release their best models, it'll shrink a whole lot faster...
    • blackqueeriroh 3mo ago
      It won’t, the government will change its mind again
  • tiahura 3mo ago
    Just because you don't get access, doesn't mean they're not innovating.
    • logicchains 3mo ago
      Their innovation relies on a huge amount of investment made under the assumption that they'll continue to be able to provide frontier models to a global audience. If it turns out the US government only lets them sell gimped models to non-citizens then they'll forfeit the whole global market to China and investors will flee like rats.
    • cromka 3mo ago
      Also applies to Chinese models. Give it 5 more months of US admin locking out US models and let's see what the market will look like for OoenAI and Anthropic IPO.
    • 3mo ago
• kmeisthax 3mo ago
  > We don’t believe this kind of government access process should become the long-term default. It keeps the best tools from users, developers, enterprises, cyber defenders, and global partners who need them. My brother in Christ, then why did you (and your competitors) spend years telling the government you needed them to tie your hands behind your back? Did you really think they'd just give you a crown that says "Gatekeeper Of All Neural Networks"?
  • tmp10423288442 3mo ago
    In the past few years, that's been primarily Anthropic, right? A lot of the really regulation-oriented people at OpenAI went to Anthropic, particularly after the failed attempt to oust Sam Altman as CEO (that was in late 2023).
  • sarky-litso 3mo ago
    brother from another mother here: I don't think they were begging for overreach from the executive branch, likely would have preferred legislation, especially the kind that could be molded by lobbyists.
• tomComb 3mo ago
  > We don’t believe this kind of government access process should become the long-term default. Really glad to see some reasonably prominent pushback against this government overreach. The information has been reporting that the government wants to individually approve which companies get access and when. Imagine the wonderful opportunities for corruption and influence peddling, not to mention, excluding any companies that don’t support Trump
  • paxys 3mo ago
    A couple of lines in a press release isn’t “pushback”.
    • Certhas 3mo ago
      Anthropic broke with US Gov over wanting restrictions and n how they use their model. OpenAI was more than happy to bend over backwards and hide behind a misleading press release. The idea that OpenAI is the one who are meaningfully pushing back against the USGov is risible.
• KronisLV 3mo ago
  So, where's the export restrictions?
  • KronisLV 3mo ago
    Update: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48690101 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48690101
• modeless 3mo ago
  > We don’t believe this kind of government access process should become the long-term default. It keeps the best tools from users, developers, enterprises, cyber defenders, and global partners who need them. I'm very glad to see them say this explicitly and prominently.
• transcriptase 3mo ago
  Those taking issue with the clear deference to the current U.S. administration would seemingly prefer it be the exact same degree of preemptive compliance and collaboration, just done behind closed doors as it was with the Biden administration. The sausage is apparently far more palatable when you only find out about the overreach, pressuring, implied threats, and censorship years later in House Judiciary Committees. Or even better if you don’t through use of NSL gag orders or implied threat of lawfare!
• kristofferR 3mo ago
  What a party pooper the current US government is... I'm not excited right now at all, while normally a new GPT release would be so much fun to test out.
• jansenmac 3mo ago
  Will these ad hoc decisions by the U.S. government, without law or clear process, not hurt the coming IPO's of Anthropic and OpenAI?
• impulser_ 3mo ago
  Again, if you think we the people are getting access to AGI you're a fool. These models aren't even that smart and they are already trying to control them and lock them down to a handful of people. Then these executive and VC wonder why people hate AI and are against them. Because the future is heading toward intelligence for the rich and you stuck with whatever model they want you to have. The next step is banning open source models. The future is not looking so bright if these models are already going locked down to whoever the government what's to have them. This is no different than the government banning books because they don't want you to learn.
  • CMay 3mo ago
    It's different, because most books don't contain the nuclear codes or have real impacts on national security. The way I see so many comments on the internet hating any sort of AI regulation, is young juveniles cursing at the installation of stoplights as they rev their engines. The world is bigger than just you, and not only you matter. Reasons exist for doing things.
    • impulser_ 3mo ago
      So you okay with the government banning open source models, and making a list of who can have access to intelligence based on who they like? That just doesn't seem like a world I want to live in. I prefer a world where everyone has the same access to the same intelligence. Go back to the beginning of the internet, you would be for limiting the internet access to those the government likes? I was around in the early days of the internet when Google dorking was a thing, you could prompt Google and find exploits into hundreds and thousands of websites, servers, ect including government website. This isn't about national security, it about power and controlling it.
      • CMay 3mo ago
        I was around back then too and experienced the full depth of the wild west. AI dwarfs that in every way. What you're talking about is small potatoes by comparison. Even the old internet, I'm kind of with you on that being something the market should naturally respond to which is why Google rightfully nerfed its search tools over the years, software changed and network infrastructure evolved. This is different. The government already silently manages many things you never hear about and limits information reporting. Reasonable people generally go "ah, ok" for things that are beyond a threshold, because it seems like a sensible role for governance. I think everyone agrees government should not simply be curating AI models that only spew public information or say something inconvenient about a political party or whatever. I also don't think people want AI models that are constantly trying to guess whether you're a child and should have certain information. That's not largely the issue. You can list me the threats that you think AI poses, and I'll let you know if you're warm or not.
• book_mike 3mo ago
  [flagged]
  • nekusar 3mo ago
    This has ALWAYS been capitalism. Just now, we're seeing what capitalist policies do to another nation, and that nation is us.
    • bumby 3mo ago
      Eh, this isn’t new to the US either. You can’t, for example, buy a nuclear weapon on the open market because we recognize the broader societal risk.
      • Forgeties79 3mo ago
        I have a feeling the latest incremental release of ChatGPT is maybe less threatening to the survival of all living species than a nuclear weapon, but I’m no expert so could be wrong.
        • bumby 3mo ago
          Sure, but it’s a bit of a strawman. Define what you think is the appropriate level of risk to society without resorting to the extremes and it becomes a more productive conversation. Is it just short of a model that can be used for bioterrorism? Security vulnerabilities that can cripple banks? Or just undermining the current capitalist incumbents? There’s a broad spectrum
          • harimau777 3mo ago
            I'd say something like: If you provide it to one company then you have to provide it to all companies. If you aren't comfortable with that, then either nationalize it or accept that no one gets it.
            • 3mo ago
• monksy 3mo ago
  Non-paywall: https://archive.is/PCQQl https://archive.is/PCQQl
• platinumrad 3mo ago
  I can't tell if this is bad for the big labs, or good because it means they now have an excuse for not showing meaningful progress in the lead ups to their IPOs.
  • akmarinov 3mo ago
    What would that IPO look like when they can’t sell their product to users and are hard capped on how much money they can earn?
    • cluckindan 3mo ago
      A private holding company and multiple smaller subsidiaries going public.
  • cbg0 3mo ago
    It will reduce usage and spur investments into competitors from the EU and likely other large nations, most likely hurting these upcoming IPOs.
  • thewebguyd 3mo ago
    It'll only be good if they do get to release it to the general public in a format that is not overly nerfed. If they don't get to release, its bad. It paints a picture that we are largely stuck with current capabilities for a while and the party is over. All those promises of "you'll get to fire everyone" now go concretely unfulfilled. Their entire valuations rely on the assumption of continued massive breakthroughs in intelligence and capabilities, and having revenue on part with taking a share of the GPD provided by white collar workers as they get replaced.
• cdrnsf 3mo ago
  Ah, so the specter of Biden doing it was bad, but this administration putting into practice is great.
  • Taek 3mo ago
    Is anyone in favor of this?
    • wahnfrieden 3mo ago
      MAGA
    • SpicyLemonZest 3mo ago
      Yes. I could not possibly be more radicalized against the current administration, and I'm in favor of this. Future models will be even more dangerous than the current ones and we must build processes now to control their release when necessary. I don't like how informal this process is, and I absolutely despise the people running it, but I strongly prefer it to no process.
    • latency-guy2 3mo ago
      Amazon, NSA, apparently a few other 3 letter agencies around the world, but the lattermost probably did not expect access to their agencies would be limited but appreciate that they aren't going to be exposed as security frauds by just anyone
  • lonelyasacloud 3mo ago
    It's good that we can be sure the policy will be fairly applied for the best of reasons and any donations for new ballrooms, ponds, jumbos etc immediately before access is granted will be entirely coincidental.
• A_D_E_P_T 3mo ago
  > Only companies approved by the government will get access. There is no process for individual users to get access to the new model. I knew the time would come when individuals on personal subscriptions get the short end of the stick. Didn't think it would come so soon. I hope we're not too badly deprecated in the months to come. Looks like I've got to improve my DeepSeek workflows.
  • cyanydeez 3mo ago
    yeah, but didn't you hope the people rubber stamping AI information weren't the nazis?
  • sixothree 3mo ago
    Also I'd be willing to bet companies in left-leaning states, or with left-leaning figureheads will be excluded from use as well. This administration is amazingly petty and has captured voter records for a reason.
    • paxys 3mo ago
      If you remove left-leaning states there’s no company remaining that will actually use these models.
      • krzyk 3mo ago
        Or provide them.
  • stanac 3mo ago
    For personal use I don't care if I get access to it. Tokens are becoming too expensive. I am using Chinese models. What worries me is that my company may never get access. I work for a well known US company, but from Europe, we also have developers in Mexico. I can only guess US gov will take this into account when deciding who gets to use the new models. Even worse than not getting access is getting fired. Since less than 20% of our developers reside outside US and our management is suffering from AI hype, they can decide to close foreign offices as a way to get access to new models. edit: grammar
• andy99 3mo ago
  In the early days of the LLM era, there was lots of talk about how big incumbents, in particular google would be disadvantaged relative to “startups” like OpenAI because of their valuable legacy businesses that could be destroyed if something went wrong. Mainly people thought about big lawsuits but government action is similar. Now OpenAI and Anthropic are big incumbents with Trillion dollar valuations at stake, so they can’t take any risks. Unlike google they don’t really have a thriving primary business to protect though, so without being able to continue to take risks and ignore regulation startup-style, it’s going to be a lot harder for them to stay relevant.
• davidw 3mo ago
  There's a huge difference between 'pro market' and 'buddies with some big businesses' and this administration is making it very clear, at least to those who would see. https://blog.supplysideliberal.com/post/47857230937/luigi-zingales-pro-market-vs-pro-business https://blog.supplysideliberal.com/post/47857230937/luigi-zi...
• cdnsteve 3mo ago
  Local AI and open-weight models are becoming something to no longer ignore. I've started a community around this @tokenstead on X and tokenstead.ai YouTube and much more coming. DGX Spark on route, RTX 5090s and much more exciting builds. We need to have AI sovereignty!
• martythemaniak 3mo ago
  Honestly, are people not getting what's going on? The US is turning into a personalist regime, there is no "government" per-se, there's a dude. There are no 'rules' there's only the dude's opinion and you'll do whatever he feels like today. The way you know this is true is to imagine The Others in power. Sacks used to scream about government interference, but now that he's running (this part of) the government, obviously things are different. The only constant is that David Sacks (& co) always believed he should have all the power.
  • lotsofpulp 3mo ago
    Of course they know what’s going on, that’s why they voted for it again in 2024. They just think they will be in the group of winners that get some crumbs.
• jquery 3mo ago
  Trump admin just banned individual users like me from using it, indefinitely, under vague authority. When did we become such a nanny state?
• petilon 3mo ago
  Last year Tim Cook gifted Trump a custom, one-of-a-kind glass plaque with a 24-karat gold base [1]. (Cook needed a policy outcome that would protect Apple's supply chain costs and avoid a costly 100% tariff on certain chips and components.) You may have to make similar offerings if you want to use the latest version of ChatGPT. [1] https://www.youtube.com/shorts/0O9QhwIkj5w https://www.youtube.com/shorts/0O9QhwIkj5w
  • throwfaraway4 3mo ago
    Yeah that and a $600 billion commitment for advance manufacturing in the US. just a minor concession
    • LastTrain 3mo ago
      All you have to do is pinky promise, you don’t have to actually do it.
• swingboy 3mo ago
  Here’s to hoping that Alibaba (and other Chinese labs) have collected some really good distilled data.
• f8ght 3mo ago
  [dead]
• sehw 3mo ago
  [dead]
• MichaelZuo 3mo ago
  Something about this makes my stomach churn… This is not a good sign for the future of the USA. I hope the country doesn’t become the new USSR.
• sajithdilshan 3mo ago
  This is the last wake up call for EU. After China starts controlling their models, in 5 years EU would be left with archaic technology compared to other major economies
  • standardUser 3mo ago
    Any future president will know better than to economically hamstring our closest allies and important trading partners.
  • damontal 3mo ago
    They will be serfs reliant on US and Chinese models to provide protection for their technological infrastructure from AI exploits.
  • samatman 3mo ago
    In five years Europe will be buying their inference machines from Apple, like everyone else.
• kyrra 3mo ago
  It seems like this was entirely caused by Dario (and Anthropic as a whole)? When you run around marketing something as a "super weapon", the government may actually take you seriously? We obviously can't A/B test this... but if Dario hadn't been doing that, would any of this been happening right now?
  • CodingJeebus 3mo ago
    Altman has done his fair share of "doom-trolling", claiming that his products are going to inevitably disrupt the global order in ways that demand government support and intervention. The entire industry has been marketing this way for years now.
  • jasonlotito 3mo ago
    > It seems like this was entirely caused by Dario No it doesn't. > When you run around marketing something as a "super weapon" That's one interpretation of what was said that ignores a lot of what was said. So yes, if you ONLY read the headlines, sure. So, an ignorant and stupid government would read it that way. But the reality was, like many things, more nuanced. However, I need not blame the messenger because the current government is led by idiotic morons. Let's put this another way: either this is valid on behalf of the government, in which case he was right ot say something. Or you disagree with this, in which case, you can only blame the government for ignornig what was actually said.
  • wbobeirne 3mo ago
    Hard to say "entirely" when you also have a movement of people and non-profits who are also pushing for more regulation.
    • deleted 3mo ago
      [deleted]
• dang 3mo ago
  All: for comments on the technical side please go to the related thread: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48689028 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48689028
• mips_avatar 3mo ago
  OpenAI/Anthropic are begging to be restricted because it's great marketing and it creates a precedent to permanently ban open weights models. The problem is nobody in government believes in/cares about commodity pricing of truly open AI and how much it could help the world economy and prosperity. Companies like Microsoft have been asleep at the wheel in terms of security for decades and now there's a model that can identify where they've been careless. That's not a "nuclear bomb level threat" or whatever Anthropic wants to call it, it's reckless carelessness by the existing companies.
  • deleted 3mo ago
    [deleted]
  • khurs 3mo ago
    Asleep at the wheel? China, Russia etc ban Microsoft software from government laptops, indicating there are intentional back doors.
    • marcosdumay 3mo ago
      In 2008 there was a scandal about how every software contractor (including the likes of Microsoft, IBM and Oracle) working for the US government had a rootkit installed on all their systems. In 2020, there was a scandal on how people just pretended to remove that rootkit and had been covering it up since the earlier scandal. The US intelligence agencies claim it's from Russia, but those agencies always claim it's from Russia. Since 2020 the press just stopped talking about it, with no hint of anything being solved. Nobody needs intentional back doors.
• I_am_tiberius 3mo ago
  Damn. This is the second post today that just disappeared from the top of the landing page. This is 100% manipulated.
  • gsibble 3mo ago
    HN is the most manipulated front page on the internet.
    • baq 3mo ago
      Top spot on HN is worth like $10M per hour or something, of course it’s manipulated, you should expect it to be
      • smilliken 3mo ago
        That extrapolates to $87B per year for just the top spot on HN, more than all of Instagram's ad revenue, or about 40x Twitter's. Or $240M per day, about 1/3 of the ad spend on Superbowl, just for the top spot.
• rgbrenner 3mo ago
  Im not worried about this at all. The OpenAI, Anthropic and the US government can play this game all they want... They're just accelerating the development of open source models; and helping destroy the lead the US has built in AI, and their profit margins along with it. This is like the battle between PostgreSQL and Oracle all over. Move up market, isolate yourself to enterprises, and watch while everyone else builds on PostgreSQL and erodes any technical advantage you had, until people just stop talking about you altogether.
  • varispeed 3mo ago
    That until it becomes illegal to have or use open source models without approval and licence from government. With more talks about on device scanning, this could be easily plumbed in. If OS detects there is open source model, it could brick your device or alert authorities. Then next step will be limiting what operating system you can install. Likely only those where you cannot remove client side scanning.
    • Daishiman 3mo ago
      Not gonna happen; the incentives for bypassing this are too high.
    • asadotzler 3mo ago
      It can't easily be plumbed in, though. I can spin up my own Linux build with none of that plumbing and do what I want with it. I can grab China's best models and use them or distilled versions on my own terms because OSS allows for that. Until hardware comes fully locked down and the models cannot be run on old hardware, both a long ways off, OSS is a way out.
      • utilize1808 3mo ago
        In the not so distant future, all your coding edits (for work anyway) will be through centralized gateways. Think remote desktop environment where pasting from the client is disabled.
• asdff 3mo ago
  This was coming for a while. For years now there have been job postings for ai safety and not really what people expect. Jobs in places like RAND, funded off DOD grants, exploring the feasibility of building a bioweapon with off the shelf tooling and measuring how far along these tools are. Maybe they figured out it was too easy now, and this is the clamping down we are seeing in response.
  • godwinson__4-8 3mo ago
    This feels like the sort of claim one should provide a source for. Sounds fairly far fetched to me.
    • asdff 3mo ago
      What part? The job posts are factual. There are still some up on rand career website although the bio specific ones are all filled now. Here is their department page on the subject where they cover the scoping (1). Mirror biology seems like something out of sci fi but it is one of their main efforts it seems so the theory must hold some water. There's also concern about bioweaponry and pandemics. The rest is me connecting the dots. 1. https://www.rand.org/global-and-emerging-risks/centers/ai-security-and-technology.html https://www.rand.org/global-and-emerging-risks/centers/ai-se...
      • godwinson__4-8 3mo ago
        Obviously the job posts were not what was in question. If you were "just connecting the dots" aka making stuff up then thanks that tells me all I need to know.
        • ianm218 3mo ago
          > Maybe they figured out it was too easy now, and this is the clamping down we are seeing in response His post was from the start thinking out loud. It’s a solid contribution. It seems against the spirit of the forum here to respond to someone unauthoritatively thinking out loud with “you’re just making stuff up!”
• smashah 3mo ago
  It's ok I will wait for the Chinese resellers :) Thank you Chinese Robin Hoods
• sigmarule 3mo ago
  > Organizations interested in model access may join the GPT 5.6 waitlist line, hosted at OpenAI's official Palm Spring satellite campus. Line begins at rear entrance with expedited VIP waitlist line options for holders of partnering cryptocurrency tokens. Application fee required for access to venue; waivers available for select US corporations. /s, maybe
  • 361994752 3mo ago
    for a couple secs, i cannot tell if you are joking or it is true...
    • deleted 3mo ago
      [deleted]
• yieldcrv 3mo ago
  never would I have thought China would win that easily GLM on LLM Asics is going to be amazing, US hosted or otherwise
• deleted 3mo ago
  [deleted]
• badprose 3mo ago
  Do we know how much choice OpenAI has with the arrangement? They call it a "request", but could they have been ordered directly?
• nilkn 3mo ago
  So the frontier will just decisively shift to open Chinese models in the near future, and once that happens, there will be no catching up.
• aristocrazy 3mo ago
  Given how the WH operates these days, this is ripe for corruption. Imagine the WH dislikes the CEO of a biotech company, while appreciating the attitude of a competitor CEO. What is to stop them from stalling on giving acess for the latest model to the company they don't like?
  • AzzyHN 3mo ago
    "Given how the WH operates these days" I've got bad news for you...
  • LastTrain 3mo ago
    They is what is currently and blatantly happening already.
  • paxys 3mo ago
    In most countries around the world corruption/bribes are necessary for doing business. Companies even account for it on their books. It was about time the US caught up.
    • amunozo 3mo ago
      In the US is already legal. It is called lobbying.
      • afavour 3mo ago
        Lobbyists exist in a lot of countries. It’s only in the US where they’re as problematic as they are.
        • Xixi 3mo ago
          PACs and super PACs are the key difference. Lobbying in the US includes practices that would fall squarely into the definition of corruption in many other Western countries. There's nothing inherently wrong with people or groups talking to representatives and advocating for their interests, even in an organized way. The problem is when it gets closer to: "Pass this law or regulation, and we'll put $USD_AMOUNT into your PAC".
• mannanj 3mo ago
  Everything is a rich man's trick. This is rich social classes claiming more for themselves. Someone convince me otherwise?
  • cma256 3mo ago
    Uh, they spent hundreds of billions to get their flag ship products blocked by a democratic body with no possibility of recovering their capital except by concession of the people's representative?
    • mannanj 3mo ago
      That's the trick part though. They are playing status games, and making particular products available to specific people. Whatever the majority of people get will be a modified, probably weakened, version of what those at higher social classes get. > with no possibility of recovering their capital except by concession of the people's representative This is definitely not true and its not that binary.
• minraws 3mo ago
  Well I was expecting it but if it's not going to become available in this subscription cycle for me I will cancel oai subs as I did with claude ones months ago... moving to open weight models is trivial now, with optimizations and stuff glm 5.2 is roughly the same price as the best models around from multiple vendors. unless I could atleast try and see Sol perform like 10x better I don't really have a reason to switch back. I used Fable for like what 2-3 days at most and didn't really feel it was so much better, only difference was I had to prompt it less, not to get what I want but to get to a working output. Code quality was still shit, still made bad plans and analysis and so on.
  • andxor 3mo ago
    > I used Fable for like what 2-3 days at most and didn't really feel it was so much better It was a lot better. I can't believe people say this.
    • maxloh 3mo ago
      That phrasing is just a way of lying to yourself. If Fable were released as open-weights, I doubt anyone would ever consider using GLM or any other models over it.
    • jenniferhooley 3mo ago
      I felt like it was about 10X better at "pretty" but straightforward 1 shot'ish type tasks. Not so different for complex and specific tasks in real code-bases. Why do you say it was a lot better, what type of tasks were you testing it on?
      • JeremyNT 3mo ago
        > I felt like it was about 10X better at "pretty" but straightforward 1 shot'ish type tasks. Not so different for complex and specific tasks in real code-bases. What metric are you using for "better" here? If I've got a straightforward task GPT 5.5 is going to 1shot it anyway.
• black_13 3mo ago
  [dead]
• dominotw 3mo ago
  Saltman prbly had to beg and bribe for this. imagine fable getting banned and this just going though. That would be like accepting defeat.
• couchdb_ouchdb 3mo ago
  It's pretty easy to solve. You just keep pushing new versions of Opus 4.8....
• forinti 3mo ago
  Does this mean that the government will compensate OpenAI for lost revenue?
• pknerd 3mo ago
  The US is turning into China. LOL! Censorship. Surveillance. (Hi, PLTR!)
  • kajman 3mo ago
    The U.S. is becoming like the place that keeps releasing the best open weight models?
    • pknerd 3mo ago
      lol
• JodieBenitez 3mo ago
  U.S. government will decide who will feed the chinese competition.
  • big-and-small 3mo ago
    They already helped Russia, gave more power and planning to unfreeze assets of Iran. Helping China achieve AI dominance is a logical next step.
• stuckkeys 3mo ago
  That is why running local models is going to be very important...This crooked administration doing crooked things. Nothing to see here.
• trashface 3mo ago
  Pretty happy for anything that will throw some sand into the gears of AI development, given all the negative externalities that are becoming apparent, even if the admin is doing it for the usual dumbass reasons.
  • softwaredoug 3mo ago
    It’s worse than that. It’s available to large companies. The WH gives them a competitive advantage against the rest of the market.
    • baby_souffle 3mo ago
      > It’s available to large companies ... that are friendly to this administration.
    • stronglikedan 3mo ago
      crony capitalism has accomplished this for decades, unfortunately
    • mirsadm 3mo ago
      Does it? That's not even well established yet. These things aren't that good.
      • palata 3mo ago
        I am all against AI (precisely because of all the externalities, like energy consumption and concentration of power and inequalities), but they definitely do give a competitive advantage in many cases.
  • jstummbillig 3mo ago
    Not sure if the USG reserving all superior models for themselves and big corp is sand in AI dev? Inference is clearly constrained, people still want better models. Everyone will still use the best they can afford -- now additionally limited by what the USG allows them to pay for.
  • 3mo ago
• kisamoto 3mo ago
  The irony to have the EU criticised for regulation on one side but complete government control of access on the other.
• daft_pink 3mo ago
  I’m generally prefer republicans, but not in favor of this!
• kilroy123 3mo ago
  Great now we're priced out of getting good enough hardware to run the top open sourced models locally. It's a matter of time before the Chinese models are banned.
• deleted 3mo ago
  [deleted]
• kgwxd 3mo ago
  All these dorks think they're Iron Man. Guess they're on the Civil War stage of his character development.
• martinjc 3mo ago
  Wowzers. It's been some time since export controls were something i'd see in software. Interesting times.
• pluc 3mo ago
  It's entertaining watching the whole world take steps to reduce reliance on the US and the US throwing arguments for it out like it's candy
  • englishspot 3mo ago
    we still have this delusion that we can just pound our chests and throw our weight around. it's clearly not working, it's not helping the citizens, but people still demand this.
  • derwiki 3mo ago
    What concrete steps have been taken?
    • petcat 3mo ago
      [flagged]
    • Gigachad 3mo ago
      Most of the world has already or is in the process of rolling out their own payment network to drop reliance on visa and Mastercard.
    • rc1 3mo ago
      Does it matter if they are not concrete? Concrete takes a long time to set. Why make a product and not sell it baffles me. Especially when others are rapidly making products.
    • standardUser 3mo ago
      Trade is being reconfigured in the midst of Trump's idiotic trade war (and even more idiotic real war) and militaries worldwide, particularly our closest allies, are seeking non-US sources of arms.
    • Havoc 3mo ago
      Think it's more of a thousand cuts by individual economic actors situation than one flashy concrete step. My buying preferences have definitely shifted to "Buy not American" on digital things. Proton, bunny, hetzner, netcup etc. Some things are harder to move, but the direction of travel is clear
• vldszn 3mo ago
  huge momentum for local and open-source LLMs
• dvh 3mo ago
  It seems like sota ai will go the way of reserve antibiotics
• softwaredoug 3mo ago
  > while AI companies and the administration work out a longer-term plan for regulation on the sector. It’s not really the executives job or role to create new regulatory structures. If they want something durable, that lasts more than one administration, they need actual laws passed by Congress.
• croes 3mo ago
  Will be hard to become profitable if you have a limited customer base
• hmokiguess 3mo ago
  Great so we just need to wait for China to catch up I guess
• mrcwinn 3mo ago
  Wait, what happened to wanting a safety first mindset and government regulation of big tech?
• atleastoptimal 3mo ago
  I feel this could turn into a patronage system. Want frontier intelligence? Better not defy the current administration, or your competitors will have access to a better model you could never use.
• paxys 3mo ago
  David Sacks has been silent for a long time.. So much for being the big “AI czar”. Does he have any influence left in the government?
• submeta 3mo ago
  [dead]
• yokoprime 3mo ago
  This makes no sense, it only will embolden any attempts by china and other countries to move away from depending on US AI tech
• deleted 3mo ago
  [deleted]
• alfiedotwtf 3mo ago
  How is this not a First Amendment issue?!
• throwaway7356 3mo ago
  Can't the AI companies spare a small investment in Trump coin to ease the process?
• general1465 3mo ago
  Good luck with those 1T USD valuations when your total addressable market now shrunk from 8 Billion people to just 300 million.
• cryo32 3mo ago
  No one trusts the US government. I’ve been warning of this sovereign risk for years. This will tank the market. See you all on the other side!
• SpaceManNabs 3mo ago
  it kinda seems like openai is doing this willinglyy and not challenging it. if they weren't doing this willingly, how would this be legal? has congress already passed a law giving the executive branch regulatory powers like this?
• mrinterweb 3mo ago
  The biggest concern is identifying "who". If the US government says only US citizens can access a model, how do they enforce that. Anthropic and OpenAI will use Persona (a company funded by Peter Thiel) to verify user identity. Verifying your identity with a government ID and linking that to AI is the dream of a surveillance state. Agents running on your computer, accessing your internet accounts, access to your personal conversations with AI, and accessible by the government is just wild. I'm hoping this is a call to action for local AI.
  • estearum 3mo ago
    No, not really. The biggest concern is the US government claiming it can decide who gets to use a product and brazenly kneecapping competitive companies who do such things as "write contracts and comply with them."
    • microgpt 3mo ago
      The US government isn't claiming that — it is telling you that fact.
      • estearum 3mo ago
        No, not really. They'll lose in court if anyone pushes back.
        • microgpt 3mo ago
          They'll do it anyway. How many of Trump's court losses has he obeyed?
          • estearum 3mo ago
            The vast majority of them actually.
    • nonethewiser 3mo ago
      Isnt the stated reason actually the most likely though? They dont want Chinese backed companies getting it. That is what they said about Fable (SK Hynix). You dont really need a conspiracy theory to explain it.
• kouru225 3mo ago
  So I guess the Chinese government will decide what model I use next
• siliconc0w 3mo ago
  What are the odds this is going to become another avenue for grift - magically any companies the trump family invests in are going to get access. Any companies that aren't sufficiently 'loyal' to the regime will have to wait or may never get access.
• rbbydotdev 3mo ago
  Reminds of the TikTok ban for security and safety only for it to be sold to a fellow crony. Can't help but see this play going down again. Threaten / Ban / Control / Pressure a technology+company, then get your cronies a seat at the board. The cynic in me suspects they were salivating so much over the Spacex IPO they wanted a finger in anthropics 2026 IPO. Banning fable ~1 day after.
  • deleted 3mo ago
    [deleted]
• vitally3643 3mo ago
  You know what? Fine. This delays the OpenAI/Anthropic/etc hegemony and creates more space for local LLM adoption and development. My company is very interested in local LLMs even just to cut back on codex spend. I imagine a lot of other businesses are, too. With the recent developments in open weight models, it seems like it's only a matter of time before they're frontier level, and any added delay in OpenAI and Anthropic models being publicly available is just more reason for businesses and individuals to try them out. Just like the Iran war accelerating fossil fuel abandonment, this administration can't even do the wrong thing without fucking it up. I say we take this win.
• deadbabe 3mo ago
  This isn’t just about AI: they do not want you to privately use computers at all, in a way that cannot be surveilled. They want to extinguish all forms of general purpose computing and restrict you to walled gardens of apps and all code written via AI with the government-in-the-middle. It will be illegal to write code by hand, only people with “bad intentions” do that, because otherwise, why not just use AI like a sane person?
  • nullbio 3mo ago
    The new propaganda campaign: YOU WOULDN'T WRITE A VARIABLE...
• flipbrad 3mo ago
  "A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, a capitalist economy subject to stringent governmental controls, violent suppression of the opposition, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism"
• kristopolous 3mo ago
  So much for the party of small government.
• oceanplexian 3mo ago
  I started to have the opinion that the Chinese models would crash the AI bubble simply because they are an order of magnitude cheaper and almost as intelligent. But if the government can simply ban models from the market? especially given how much the admin loves the idea of Tariffs? Knowing Trump the chance of this happening is 99.9% We will all be stuck paying $50/mtok to Anthropic (And by we I mean only Big Tech will be able to afford tokens). The rest of the competition will be outcompeted by super intelligent machines. And AI CO’s /Big Tech will take over the economy.
• deleted 3mo ago
  [deleted]
• AJRF 3mo ago
  Fair enough, i'm off to use GLM. Let's see how this plays out US gov
• __abc 3mo ago
  what's weird, is my employees abroad (outside the US) have access to Anthropic Fable .... so what exactly did we prevent by limiting United States citizens from having access ....
• NDlurker 3mo ago
  Looks like China wins the AI race
• eth0up 3mo ago
  When I predicted this several months ago, here (mine my comment history) I was berated and downvoted, but primarily ignored. I have records, timestamped, of predicting this a year ago. Alright, great for me, pat myself on the back and get stuffed. Roger that. What disturbs me is that this was not extremely obvious and predictable to everyone else. I have been called schizophrenic for my views on AI, here, and I kind of see how some could miss my points, but I am genuinely perplexed by the views on the subject I see around here, or specifically the views I don't see here. Did anyone really not see this coming long ago? I have year-old transcripts discussing exactly what's happening with AI and government intervention. I even have a time-stamped transcript with Sonnet 12 hours prior, soft-predicting the shutdown of Fable. What is not clear about this?
• stevetron 3mo ago
  I'm waiting for that government subcommittee hearing where they are supposed to decide if my new cpu design is big endian or little endian. And they can't seem to decide if it should be coded in octal or hexadecimal. There's a separate committe deciding if the cpu clocke's phase 2 should be 90-degrees or 180 degrees different. There's a special group trying to decide how may accumulators the cpu should have. And there's a markdown already going on to decide if the flags register should have a separate flags for republicans and democrats.
  • thewebguyd 3mo ago
    > markdown Hey now, this is Government we're talking about. There's no markdown, it must be MS Word .docx in Times New Roman, emailed back and forth.
• LocalH 3mo ago
  Can we just go ahead and shut the US down right now? We had a good run, but we've clearly been moving in the wrong direction for almost as long as I've been alive.
  • frollogaston 3mo ago
    You can leave if you don't like it
• midasz 3mo ago
  So as a European, I'm being blocked from all new models apparently. I'm a big fan of using Claude Code for my sideprojects and for those I don't really care about sharing context. Is there aything that comes close to Claude Code and is still affordable?
• mannanj 3mo ago
  A big problem is "U.S. government" muddies the conversation because of how undefinable and large that group is. Who is deciding who gets to use GPT-5.6? Which organizations? Which leaders? Focus on that to have a clearer conversation. Without doing this it's like jerking each other off to stroke our egos. You might as well as say "The World will decide who gets to use GPT-5.6"
  • laweijfmvo 3mo ago
    it would be one thing if congress passed a bunch of (probably inadequate) legislature that every AI company had to follow to operate in the US. it's another when it's a faceless/nameless group of people probably deciding arbitrarily based on mood and bribes.
  • jiggawatts 3mo ago
    > Which leaders? Trump and his cronies. Nobody else in the US Gov is so openly corrupt and has the unitary executive power to ban the products of privately held companies for sale without there being a public record (i.e.: an act of congress).
    • mannanj 3mo ago
      I see. That’s at least workable. Now you have a face and a group of people responsible for your suffering and problems. And what are you going to do about it?
      • jiggawatts 3mo ago
        I live in Australia… so nothing. Not my problem! Over here we depose of our leaders when their corruption comes to light.
        • mannanj 3mo ago
          yeah. over here, most people are sick and hostile to each other and under some spell of propaganda where they think only others are under the spell while being falsely certain they themselves are not. it leads to an environment where if you are one of the few asking questions, leading for change, trying to help others by criticizing popular leaders you get attacked by your fellow country men and women. it isn't a great place to talk and organize and ask questions in most environments. im sure a few small, niche, safe spaces for curiosity and breaking from corruption and lies and deceit exist. they just feel to be fewer and farther between.
• haxhiuargjend 3mo ago
  crazy times
• sunshine-o 3mo ago
  Honest question: for those working with those models on offensive security, how much does this move make sense? I am asking because I have seen a growing number of stories about organizations getting owned by either raw mismanagement of security, supply chain attacks that are often a failure at the ecosystem level, npm, etc. I am not really seeing from what we hear about the use of AI for penetration as a threat yet. The growing problem with security seems to be more at the management and ecosystem layers. Not many story that netfilter, ipfw or pf got owned by one of those frontier models. A lot of stories that organisation X and Y left keys on a public repo for months.
• tjs275x2076 3mo ago
  fake news
• ur-whale 3mo ago
  https://archive.ph/d4llF https://archive.ph/d4llF
• khurs 3mo ago
  "All publicity is good publicity" Whilst this policy is driving countries around the world to develop new AI strategies as USA cannot be relied upon, on the plus side for OpenAI, the publicity of this will help drive customer sales.
  • petcat 3mo ago
    China seems to be handling themselves just fine. > driving countries around the world to develop new AI strategies Unfortunately Europe is completely incapable of doing anything whatsoever to counter this.
• finnjohnsen2 3mo ago
  Less money to US AI tech. This could be good long term to move us away from them.
• jmyeet 3mo ago
  It's fascinating to watch the US government paint China as the new bogeyman and utterly fail in it's policy of containment. The first obvious conclusion is that China has been utterly vindicated to keep US tech giants out of China. Some have a token presence but it's clear that the Chinese government will never let a US tech government "win" in any domestic market. It will always be a Chinese company. Obligatory Silicon Valley [1]. The second is that, to that end, IMHO the US government made an error blocking the sale of high-end chips (particularly NVidia) to China. Why? Because it's created a captive market for Chinese chip manufacturing. Huawei now has billions in potential sales that might've otherwise gone to chips produced in Taiwan and South Korea. Third, the US can somehow ban a Dutch company (ASML) from selling EUV to China. This has forced China to replicate it and they will within a few years. The interesting part of this is that all it really takes is throwing money at a few key researchers and engineers who worked for ASML. It really is using the mechanics of the Western economic system against itself. Last, the US government will try and make US tech giants "own" or "win" AI. And they will fail because the Chinese government will make sure they fail. How? By releasing ever-better open models for free. I believe China considers this a matter of national security to not be beholden to US tech giants (and thus the US government). The ironic thing to me is that the US is doing what the West accuses China of doing with corporate control. I'd say the actual difference is that Chinese companies are beholden to the state whereas the US government is basically 5 companies in a trenchcoat. The US wants to mint trillionaires at the expense of literally everybody else. China believes society should benefit from something they collectively make possible. Anyway, we've been here before. Remember the crypto export ban of the 1990s and 2000s? Did that prevent higher-quality encryption from being used overseas? No. This won't help either. [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Km5XQxRrQvw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Km5XQxRrQvw
• abcd1234 3mo ago
  For access email: jlarson@openai.com
  • 0xbadcafebee 3mo ago
    you've been sitting on a HN account since 2009 and this is your first comment? how many of these do you have socked away?
    • ygg12 3mo ago
      Yeah this is wild wtf
    • LightBug1 3mo ago
      Digital preppers ... Starting to sound logical right about now ...
• jmward01 3mo ago
  This is regulatory capture in action. This will make it hard/impossible for new vendors to come into the market and only established companies will get to play, and charge, for LLMs. What does this mean for open source? Will it become illegal to download weights? What about train your own? Are we heading to a world where GPU use is regulated to ensure that illegal LLMs aren't being processed on your machine? More broadly though, how will this stop anyone but average people? Countries outside the us will completely ignore this and keep developing and moving ahead. Maybe Europe will adopt similar things but the genie is out. I can train insainly powerful models on my laptop. If you want to stop LLMs with legislation you can't do it like this.
  • itemize123 3mo ago
    literally the opposite of regulatory capture - it spells trouble for specifically openai and anthropic mostly
    • gwerbin 3mo ago
      That's often how regulatory capture works. It seems bad for the incumbents, but it's worse for any future competitor. As long as the cost of complying with the regulation is less than your expected loss from competition entering the market, then it's net positive for the incumbent.
      • sooheon 3mo ago
        I think this is plain old regulation, not regulatory capture. For it to be the latter we'd need evidence than it was the incumbents who designed this oversight which they then asked the white house to rubber stamp.
        • gwerbin 3mo ago
          ...I think we have plenty of evidence of that
  • foota 3mo ago
• jdelman 3mo ago
  While purely speculation, I believe the same thing would have happened, albeit even sooner, under a Harris administration. Government intervention was inevitable and it will have to be worked out through the law.
• snickerbockers 3mo ago
  >“We don’t believe this kind of government access process should become the long-term default. It keeps the best tools from users, developers, enterprises, cyber defenders, and global partners who need them,” the blog post said. “We are taking this short-term step because we believe it is the strongest path to broader availability in the coming weeks.” Arent these the same clowns who keep saying that the government needs to regulate AI to protect society [from their competitors] or whatever? And im not just talking about back when they used to be a nonprofit, Altman was still using that line post-sellout too.
• firefax 3mo ago
  never thought being a script kiddie would make me smart, but here we are in 2026. i had one place, they were using all these shady pay with a credit card for "points" to do these web gui things that were... basically nmap, dig, etc? so i wrote up a small shell script that took in the servers our (often nonprofit) clients wanted scanned... and so we could lower our costs and free up analyst time -- but sadly they often found out they had out of date windows boxen they couldn't afford to fix, and we'd have to settle for getting them onto MFA, using password managers and basics like that. people overvalue AI imho. people are getting weak, they don't teach themselves the concepts that would allow them to make best use of AI. anyways, i think the type of person freaking out is the same who's been cutting and pasting from stack overflow rather than learning enough to grab a book or read up on a library to get the needful done. but hey, what do i know? i'm just some freak on hacker news (proudly writing w/o AI :-))
• pipes 3mo ago
  Can anyone explain to me (a non US citizen) how this won't be found to be unconstitutional (eventually)?. I would think it falls under freedom of expression. And given the attempted classification of encryption as a munition that failed, I don't see how this can possibly last?
  • oliver236 3mo ago
    constitutional rights only apply to us citizens i believe
  • gallerdude 3mo ago
    Well it seems both Anthropic and OpenAI are consciously choosing to do this, which means, for now, neither plan on suing. So if no one sues, how could it be unconstitutional?
    • dmix 3mo ago
      Both companies 100% helped create this situation with their incessant safety and cybersecurity hype. Reaping what they sowed.
      • gallerdude 3mo ago
        I think they're pretty happy to have government sharing some of the big societal responsibility, honestly.
• nativeit 3mo ago
  Well, as long as the government is deciding, that’s alright then. The US government is a paragon of incorruptible integrity and even-handed, thoroughly considered reasoning. We’re in good hands, folks.
• nativeit 3mo ago
  [dead]
• mirekrusin 3mo ago
  "for the benefit of all humanity *" * with big pockets
• mkotlikov 3mo ago
  US will ban Chinese models and try to get their allies to do the same. Just like they did with Huawei. Alternatively, they'll put up legal roadblocks that open models are unlikely to jump over due to costs or other reasons. Otherwise they're putting US frontier labs at a huge disadvantage by preventing them from recouping costs on their biggest models. How much more will OpenAI and Anthropic models cost when they're the only AI you can legally use?
• michaelfm1211 3mo ago
  Oh no, the powerful tool that can be used for good or evil is restricted by the people whose job it is to restrict dangerous things! This is the end of freedom! We're all doomed!
• k12sosse 3mo ago
  Thankfully only American content went into building it, or else that would be a total douchebag manoeuvre
• deleted 3mo ago
  [deleted]
• deleted 3mo ago
  [deleted]
• deleted 3mo ago
  [deleted]
• luc_ 3mo ago
  Top 2 comments fail to acknowledge the elephant in the room. It's not about the tech. We have a corrupt administration gatekeeping two powerful models for companies set to go public soon. I bet the models are powerful. I also bet there is a lot of money being exchanged, too, for keeping the bubble big, so certain people will profit. Trump doesn't care about the people. He cares about himself.
• deleted 3mo ago
  [deleted]
• aabhay 3mo ago
  To all of those thinking that GLM/OSS will save you — keep in mind that the model size needed to compete here likely requires an NVL72 or similar — 72GPU dedicated infra to run a hosted model. This will almost certainly get regulated by the gov’t as well, and even if not so there will only be a handful of companies that can afford it.
• cft 3mo ago
  If true, I think Trump is nuts. He's alienating the very people in the Silicon Valley that helped him to win.
• olalonde 3mo ago
  Brilliant strategy if the goal is to make sure the next major breakthrough happens anywhere but in the US.
• pippo1974 3mo ago
  The rest of the word at some point will increase chinese AI company. I am using some of their services and for many task they are good enough . It can be a winning strategy for a short period and a disaster in long term. Xi and China i think , are very happy of these decisions. They are building their model and their hardware. Even if for now it is subpar ( i don't know, it is an hypotesys), money that us will lose for this choice will make Chinese products improve a lot .
• mcintyre1994 3mo ago
  It's quite funny to think about the reaction this would be getting from people like David Sacks, if it was literally anybody except Trump.
• luxuryballs 3mo ago
  That feeling when you’re a frontier AI company and your marketing team is just way too good.
• aunty_helen 3mo ago
  Age verification for social media. Approval lists for AI models. Two sides of the same coin. The administration is taking the opportunity now on the back of fear mongering done by the labs. The labs get regulatory lock-in, the govt gets surveillance. Everybody (that matters) wins.
• wrsh07 3mo ago
  Whether or not you assume bad intent of the government here, the amount of money the export control on Fable has cost Anthropic has to be unbelievably high Eg I expect I would have paid more than 2x per day what I spent the past few weeks, and if gpt 5.6 comes out and is competitive that's going to absolutely gain market share. An unbelievably costly turn of events for them
• yshvrdhn 3mo ago
  I think there can be smarter ways to fix security issues right. Like you let AI loose in a gated environment fix all things it flags and than release the model ? Any new changes you make you now anyway have the AI vet it ?
• davesque 3mo ago
  I'm finding it extremely hard not to have a cynical perspective on all of this. There's an idea that I've been mapping onto this whole this, which could be called something like effective knowledge. Regular old knowledge is just information, or access to information. Effective knowledge is the integration of all that information into an understanding that can be acted upon. That requires things like time, money, and involves the usual socioeconomic hurdles that have separated people into groups like "laborers" and "knowledge workers". Sure, in theory "anyone" could read textbooks and learn, but only a select few have the time, money, mentors in their lives, and so forth to really do that. The rise in capability of LLMs over the past year has basically removed a lot of these boundaries for people. Learning, building, and experimenting is a lot easier when you have a capable partner like Claude to help you along the way. Claude doesn't always get everything right, and you have to be a skeptic, but it's a lot better than nothing. When I see the government restricting access to LLMs (or Anthropic as they were doing with Mythos before the whole Fable debacle), I basically just see the same old pattern of the ruling class moving to protect their advantage by keeping the great masses in ignorance. Broadening access to LLMs (i.e. effective knowledge) would put everyone on a more level playing field. But we can't have that, because politics, nations, the economy, blah blah reasons reasons. Guess utopia will just have to wait a bit longer. But then again, this feels a lot like cryptography export controls. Those controls are in place, but I doubt anyone really thinks they work or make much of a difference. Software is not like nuclear weapons, and a data center is a much smaller lift than a Uranium enrichment facility. So maybe this is just a temporary roadblock. But let me tell you, I sure am ready for it to feel more like the government is working for (not against) the people.
  • tukantje 3mo ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIKW_pyramid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIKW_pyramid
• deleted 3mo ago
  [deleted]
• credit_guy 3mo ago
  Here's an unpopular opinion: this might be the only way to deploy advanced models. A lot of people compare advanced AI with nuclear weapons. Creating white lists of users that are allowed to use advanced AI feels wrong. It feels against everything that the Constitution stands for. That men are created equal and they are free to pursue their happiness. Now they are free to pursue that happiness only if the US Government signs off on that. It hurts to only think of that. But I'm afraid there's no other way. These models, in the wrong hands, can result in unfathomable devastation. How do I know? Dario Amodei said that when he explained why Anthropic has to limit the US Government's usage of its models [1]: > Some uses are also simply outside the bounds of what today’s technology can safely and reliably do. Two such use cases [...]: Mass domestic surveillance. Fully autonomous weapons. If the US Government can't be trusted with such uses, then how can you trust millions or billions of users with arbitrary usage? [1] https://www.anthropic.com/news/statement-department-of-war https://www.anthropic.com/news/statement-department-of-war
  • bitexploder 3mo ago
    They can only slow down open models and open weight models from getting as good as Mythos/Fable and GPT 5.6. Then what? They will all get distilled, down trained, and the smaller models will get better too.
    • credit_guy 3mo ago
      I don't think open weight model will get as good as Mythos/Fable or GPT 5.6. Not in the next few years, and perhaps never. The Chinese Communist Party is not any happier than the US Government to see millions/billions of people being able to use incredibly dangerous models.
• groundzeros2015 3mo ago
  The downside of marketing your product as being too powerful to be safe is that people start taking it seriously. I’m surprised there isn’t more discussion about the contradiction. If it really is the end of labor and a deadly weapon then export controls actually make sense. So which position should the government take? The one it’s doing? Or that LLMs aren’t actually key to national security.
• taintlord 3mo ago
  [dead]
• aussieguy1234 3mo ago
  Give it a year, open source will catch up, then things will get very interesting.
• hmokiguess 3mo ago
  Soon there will be a new safety industry reselling access and/or certification and compliance, oh wait there is already ...
• thraway3837 3mo ago
  Does anyone else think this is all just FUD, smoke, mirrors and marketing hype? "Look, our model is so good that the government told us to stop" "Our model is so good that the government is going to control who has access to it". Come on. I think occam's razor can be applied here. And like everything else, its about money. I don't know exactly what the play will be here, but this doesn't sound like this technology is too powerful and more like billions of $ lost investments need to be made up somehow without the people getting annoyed about the government bailing these guys (AI companies, investors, etc.) out.
• laughing_man 3mo ago
  Remember when you could only get the Netscape version with good encryption if you were in the US, because the government had classified encryption as a munition? And that the rest of the world had no trouble matching or exceeding that level of encryption? Is this going to be like that?
• devilfileprong 3mo ago
  I guess Orpheus fined 50% of Eurydice's soul for early withdrawal attempt - No take backsies is clearly in the Contract.Upheld.But Orpheus gets a coupon for free ressurection (Void in thrace:There can be sage).
• ahmedehab_01 3mo ago
  [dead]
• mmaunder 3mo ago
  The new normal for the next decade: You must protect the public from us and all others, and we are your closest ally so we make your rules for us and our competition. This wasn’t a lucky outcome. They laid the groundwork years ago with the AI “ethics” movement and this was the play all along.
• gmerc 3mo ago
  Orbans Hungary Playbook. The real headline should be “Donald Trump gets to decide”.
• dannypostma 3mo ago
  Where’s YN calling this a “marketing stunt”?
• monkamonme 3mo ago
  [flagged]
• throwa632 3mo ago
  [dead]
• throw315 3mo ago
  LLMs have two avenues. One is the realm of self improvement in fields with verifiable output like programming and math. The other is natural language where they can't generalize super well, and therefore need a lot of new training data. Today new data means interactions with an LLM, which is what only the leading chat providers have. In both cases they will continue to improve and slowly replace white collar jobs. The biggest bottleneck currently is lack of hearing and seeing capabilities which isolates LLM training data input to entered text mostly. Once they start interacting with people by observing their behavior, almost all knowledge will be trained on. Then they will become adept lawyers and psychologists. Behavioural understanding can be only 5 years away. After that they will be limited by their navigation , i.e., robotics.
• johnathan101 3mo ago
  [flagged]
• tornikeo 3mo ago
  All they had to do is to keep their mouths shut.
• munchausen42 3mo ago
  [dead]
• BatteryMountain 3mo ago
  Dictatorship. Complete with a trashy despot. Coming to a country near you.
• nullbio 3mo ago
  Can we all boycott Anthropic now for persisting with a 5 year long fear-mongering campaign that is destroying the US AI industry and creating a new form of intelligence-access underclass? Or are we going to play the whole "you guys suck... but I'll keep using your product" game?
• Gud 3mo ago
  Serious question, what are my alternatives?
• niraj898 3mo ago
  This type of things is what frustates the people around, its like they are already trying to control an supposed to be open-source model and just for their own benefit. this is why CHINA will eventually rule the tech space.
• tearwear 3mo ago
  Portfolio Communism
• secretsatan 3mo ago
  Every sane business needs to get out of the reach of that administration as soon as possibly
• jtfrench 3mo ago
  Superintelligence for me and not for thee.
• ivell 3mo ago
  I guess we need to kick start SETI@Home like compute donations for training models.
• resters 3mo ago
  This is what we get when the president is a nepo baby who inherited a fortune and bankrupted many companies and had mainly business failures before entering politics. I’m quite confident that few people are more ignorant on AI than Donald Trump. That he promised less regulation and lied is no different than his many other lies. In six months everyone will cancel frontier subscriptions.
• resters 3mo ago
  Regulation at the state level (which is what Sacks and the toadies were so against) is far superior to this bc it is local and bad ideas only affect those in one state! Bad Federal regulation has a much larger blast radius. Let’s hope Chinese models save us from this. BYD is trying to save us from Elon but 100% tariffs are welfare keeping Elon afloat.
• karussell 3mo ago
  Even if these models are so strong that they become a security threat if in the wrong hands this arbitrary and intransparent regulation worries me. Not for the current SOTA model vendors but for the open weight models. I have always wondered how AI industry is not in a (partial) bubble because open weight models will substantially eat into their revenue (rather sooner than later). But with this ('bro') regulation it seems that an easy strategy could be to regulate this problem away, especially easy to convince everyone that those chines models are truly evil.
• submeta 3mo ago
  What is the incentive of the U.S. government? Is it to prevent adversaries from accessing this powerful technology? Because of security concerns? Or is there a fear that European, Asian, Latin American, and other companies could use it to build competitive products? What happened to free trade? What about all of humanity advancing and making progress?
• someguyornotidk 3mo ago
  I asked this question in another thread [1] but I'll ask it in a different way here: If the US continues to limit advanced AI to it's own domestic companies, US companies will have a large unfair advantage over foreign competitors who will no longer able to compete. Wouldn't it then make sense for governments around the world to start banning or tariffing US products and services to protect their industries? 1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48696965 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48696965
  • jefftk 3mo ago
    Limiting exports of AI services to all foreigners is probably allowed under GATS, since there's no favoring one county over another. But even then there's a national security exemption, which fits reasonably well with US arguments here. If a country thought the AI export restrictions were inconsistent with treaty the remedy is challenging them, not unilaterally imposing their own tariffs. But even if they got a favorable panel decision the US would speak, and the Appellate Body is non-functional because the US stopped consenting to the addition of new members and all the terms expired. Which means anything that gets appealed is frozen indefinitely waiting for the AB to reach a quorum that won't come until the US changes is mind (and Biden didn't reverse Trump's decision here).
  • beaker52 3mo ago
    He gotcha: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn4rd71411ko https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn4rd71411ko Trump threatens 100% tariff on European nations over tech tax
• seydor 3mo ago
  Meanwhile china treats this as just another tech, among many. They might release better models without any fanfare. Difference between a state ran by civil engineers vs financial engineers
• hmokiguess 3mo ago
  Job Interviews in 2026: My biggest quality? I am an American citizen and a trusted partner. Worst quality? I am on a waitlist for Mythos preview Yes I’m looking forward to tokenmaxxing together and looking forward for your answer!
• torpfactory 3mo ago
  On top of the obvious grift and bribe seeking potential there is also now an obvious mechanism for ideological control. Govt doesn’t like the way the model describes the events of Jan 6? We’ll have to see how many people get to use it… We are very clearly proceeding down the road to a dystopia here.
• m3kw9 3mo ago
  It will only be a couple weeks relax. 5.5 works perfectly fine for most tasks.
• motbus3 3mo ago
  This will limit a lot how much they can invest in a model. Because of it is better than the current it will have less and less users until only the government can use it.
• robeym 3mo ago
  So I'm guessing as a result of this, FAANG and similar companies are going to have free access while the little guy will be left out. Is there any concrete information on whether this would be an application process or perhaps for companies that meet certain criteria?
• LightBug1 3mo ago
  LOOOOOOOOOOOL USA RIP.
• K0balt 3mo 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.
  • awestroke 3mo ago
    > 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. Source?
    • K0balt 3mo ago
      There was a prominent hacker news article about it today, but it seems to have disappeared? Or more like I can’t find it. Look up 360 security technology tulongfeng and yitianzhen , as well as Sakana AI’s Fugu series, IIRC. GLM5.2 is also excellent, it found things in our codebase that 5.5 and opus 4.8 both missed.
• phendrenad2 3mo ago
  Key Escrow 2.0
• teekert 3mo ago
  "U.S. government will decide who will switch to deepseek" Or, as a European, thanx for letting Mistral catch-up, I was looking for a reason to use it... A foreign gov deciding what I can use or being able to suddenly pull the plug on my tool makes it easier to choose the lesser quality. (And now I hope my own leaders won't start pulling models :p)
• ric2b 3mo ago
  This administration banned states from legislating AI, then turns around and does draconian measures like this. None of them care about states rights, they just want to control things directly.
• MollyRealized 3mo ago
  What are they basing their right to do so upon?
• peheje 3mo ago
  I completely trust the government to keep dangerous AI away from bad guys. After all, they did a perfect job stopping illegal guns and drugs.
• nojvek 3mo ago
  For all the millions that Marc and Ben Andreesen spent lobbying for Trump saying "Biden will control who gets to use AI and small players don't have a chance". Oh the Irony! Anyone serious about the future should see the writing on the wall. We shouldn't give too much power to the government or the billionaires. May the open weight/open source models win the future.