The Anthropic ‘Fable’ saga proves: we have opened the AI Pandora’s box. What now? | Nathan E Sanders and Bruce Schneier
Source: US news | The Guardian · Bias: Center Left
Summary
We have opened the AI Pandora’s box. Now we have to make the best of itOn 9 June, Anthropic released its Fable generative AI model. Three days later, the US government classified it as a dangerous munition, and used its export-control authority to prohibit any foreign nationals from accessing it. Unable to differentiate between Americans and foreigners, the company shut off access for everyone.The government’s actions won’t help. The problem isn’t any one particular models; it’s the general trend of increasing AI capabilities. And any real solution requires the sort of collective action that just isn’t possible right now.Bruce Schneier is a security technologist who teaches at the Harvard Kennedy School at Harvard University Continue reading...
The Anthropic ‘Fable’ saga proves: we have opened the AI Pandora’s box. What now? | Nathan E Sanders and Bruce Schneier
Center Left
We have opened the AI Pandora’s box. Now we have to make the best of itOn 9 June, Anthropic released its Fable generative AI model. Three days later, the US government classified it as a dangerous munition, and used its export-control authority to prohibit any foreign nationals from accessing it. Unable to differentiate between Americans and foreigners, the company shut off access for everyone.The government’s actions won’t help. The problem isn’t any one particular models; it’s the general trend of increasing AI capabilities. And any real solution requires the sort of collective action that just isn’t possible right now.Bruce Schneier is a security technologist who teaches at the Harvard Kennedy School at Harvard University Continue reading...
The fight that scrubbed the world's most powerful AI models from the internet featured personality clashes, industry confusion, and international backlash.Why it matters: Anthropic's models are back online, but the impact of its 20-day showdown with the Trump administration will be long lasting.Behind the scenes: It began when Amazon, Anthropic's partner and investor, sounded an alarm that was later disputed by cybersecurity experts.It warned about a "jailbreaking" issue it found with the AI lab's latest models, Mythos and Fable — meaning a technical flaw that could have caused a failure of their guardrails.Amazon flagged its concerns to the administration, triggering sweeping export controls. A U.S. official said the government conducted its own tests once it became apparent that the issue needed to be addressed.Cybersecurity experts, however, later wrote in an open letter to the administration that other leading AI models have the same issue Amazon warned about with Anthropic.On June 12, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, at the direction of President Trump, called Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei. Lutnick made clear to Amodei the issue needed to be resolved fast and alerted the CEO that the company would be receiving a letter imposing sweeping export controls, the U.S. official said.Amodei called Lutnick back that night after receiving the letter, realizing it effectively meant the models would have to be taken offline — to which Lutnick responded that was indeed the goal.That decision led to a three-week, multi-agency crash course in AI safety.Anthropic deployed engineers to Washington D.C. According to a U.S. official, the company wanted to prove everything was already resolved and further changes were being fine tuned.But the federal Center for AI Standards and Innovation and the National Security Agency said those changes weren't good enough, prompting further fixes, according to the U.S. official.Gradually, various agency heads approved of the changes, and on July 1 the models were released, the official said.Out of all of the administration officials Amazon's Andy Jassy could have called, it was Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent who first heard about the jailbreaking issue found in the company report, according to a separate source familiar.Bessent was early to sound the alarm on Mythos, work with White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles to re-engage the embattled company, and help get a cybersecurity executive order across the finish line.While technical discussions to address the jailbreaking issue took place in D.C., it was Bessent who stood next to President Trump during the G7 where allies called for global cooperation on safety standards.At the center of the showdown was Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, who also flanked Trump at the G7 meeting while his department's teams led technical discussions.National cyber director Sean Cairncross, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Treasury Department chief information officer Sam Corcos, and the NSA also all participated in technical discussions, according to various sources.Washington mobilized faster to hold scores of meetings and pulled in far more agencies than one would expect for a single technical issue, one source said.The tension spiraled amid personality clashes and poor communication.Anthropic eventually understood that in order to be successful they needed to be on the same side as the government, the U.S. official said.As discussions turned more technical, Anthropic policy chief Sarah Heck and Anthropic co-founder Tom Brown got more involved. Brown also had multiple conversations with Lutnick and Cairncross the weekend of June 12.There was never a moment where Dario stepped offstage and someone else replaced him, one source said, adding that Brown's technical expertise allowed him to sit in a room with government specialists and go line‑by‑line through how models behave under stress.Between the lines: It remains uncertain when and how Anthropic's models will be released to ally countries around the world — which proponents say is key to beating China — or how other labs from OpenAI to Google will release their latest models.OpenAI, whose latest model GPT-5.6 is on hold, did not have visibility into discussions between Anthropic and the White House and is engaged in daily technical discussions on the release of its own model, a source said.The bottom line: There's a lot of work left to be done on a framework for approving future models with a clear inclusive process that has transparency standards and timelines, sources familiar said.
In our July Fourth special broadcast, we revisit our interview with longtime technology reporter Karen Hao, author of Empire of AI, which unveils the accruing political and economic power of artificial intelligence companies — especially Sam Altman’s OpenAI. Her reporting uncovered the exploitation of workers in Kenya, attempts to take massive amounts of freshwater from communities in Chile, along with numerous accounts of the technology’s detrimental impact on the environment. “This is an extraordinary type of AI development that is causing a lot of social, labor and environmental harms,” says Hao in an extended interview.
Donald Trump is still trying to stiff E. Jean Carroll, according to the columnist’s attorney.Roberta Kaplan, Carroll’s lawyer, wrote in a court filing Tuesday that Trump’s legal representative had called her the day prior asking for another delay to the $5 million sum Trump owes the writer. Later Monday, Kaplan said she informed Trump’s team that “Carroll does not consent,” and asked whether Trump would comply with the immediate disbursement of funds.Carroll has a long and unfortunate history with the president. Trump was found liable by a jury in May 2023 for having sexually assaulted Carroll in the mid-1990s, for which she was awarded $5 million in damages. He subsequently lost his defamation case against her the following January, when a judge ruled that Trump had continued to defame the advice columnist by denying the assault on the basis that she wasn’t his “type,” and by accusing her of making up the allegations against him for the benefit of her book. A jury awarded Carroll $83.3 million in that case.But Carroll hasn’t yet seen a dime from either case. In May, a federal appeals court allowed Trump to continue staving off his payments until the Supreme Court decided whether or not to pick up the case. The court made their decision Monday, rejecting Trump’s challenge and allowing the verdict to stand.In a separate filing Tuesday, Kaplan asked a judge to implement an expedited payment schedule for the sum that Trump owes Carroll. She referred to a June 2023 filing in which both parties agreed that Carroll could collect if the Supreme Court refused to hear the case.Kaplan added that, by this point, the $5 million sum had accrued an additional $779,783 in interest, raising Trump’s initial debt to nearly $5.8 million.Nonetheless, Trump has continued to make a target out of Carroll. In May, the Justice Department opened a criminal investigation into the writer, probing whether Carroll committed perjury in her previous cases against Trump.
Ever since a jury found President Donald Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation in 2023, the Republican has vowed vengeance against the woman the court declared he forced himself upon in 1996. The Supreme Court has rejected Trump’s attempt to get the $5 million he owes Carroll overturned, and Carroll is now demanding that Trump pay her without further delay.In a new twist, a conservative legal group is attempting to punish the lawyer who successfully defended Carroll.“[National Legal and Policy Center] today filed a complaint with the Attorney Grievance Committee (AGC) of the New York State Supreme Court against Roberta Ann Kaplan for violating the Rules of Professional Conduct regarding the outside funding of E. Jean Carroll’s two defamation lawsuits against President Trump,” the NLPC announced on Thursday. “The lawsuits were funded by left-wing billionaire Reid Hoffman through a nonprofit called American Future Republic.”In their complaint, the NLPC claims that Carroll knowingly provided false information when she was asked during a deposition if her legal fees were bankrolled by outside sources. She said she did not, although she later said she made a mistake and her lawyers corrected the mistake as soon as possible. The NLPC also accused Kaplan of a having a “contingency fee she charged Carroll plus the legal fees she was getting from Hoffman” as being “‘excessive fees’ and thus violated New York ethics rules.”The NLPC described Hoffman as having “a near-pathological obsession with Trump and had a close relationship with Jeffrey Epstein.” It omitted to mention that Trump was close friends with Epstein, a child sex trafficker, for decades and was accused of sexually assaulting a 13-year-old girl in an encounter that Epstein facilitated. He is confirmed to have partied with Epstein privately, while young women were present, on several occasions.“As the complaint noted, it’s not clear Ms. Kaplan informed her client of Hoffman’s association with a sexual convict and his efforts to rehabilitate Epstein’s reputation to get Carroll’s informed consent to use Hoffman’s group to fund her lawsuits,” the NLPC added.Ironically, Trump himself has been accused of committing perjury during the case."That was his defense to sexual abuse. She's not my type," legal expert Adam Klasfeld explained in May. "And in this deposition, he was shown a picture that he was not aware included E. Jean Carroll, pointed to that picture, and confused her with Marla Maples. So clearly, she was his type. He confused her with his second wife."Another legal expert, Katie Phang, pointed out that it’s revealing that Trump and his supporters are not accusing Carroll of perjury regarding the substance of her claim — namely, that Trump sexually forced himself on her in a dressing room in 1996."But here's the thing: you notice how they're not going after her about the substantive testimony she provided about the sexual assault that she was victimized by Trump, right?" Phang observed. "They're not going after that. They're not going after the underlying facts of what she has alleged happened to her at the hands of Donald Trump. That is the tell."
LeBron James’ tenure with the Lakers is over after he informed the NBA franchise he’d spent the past eight seasons with that he’ll sign elsewhere in free agency. While both sides have shown each other nothing but respect since James’ decision went public, it is clear that his and the Lakers’ relationship wasn’t perfect. If...