Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

FOR THE FIRST TIME, THE US GOVERNMENT PULLED A PUBLICLY DEPLOYED AI MODEL OFFLINE. THE MARKET SHOULD PAY ATTENTION. 🇺🇸 On June 12, the Commerce Department ordered Anthropic to block access to its newest models, Fable 5 and Mythos 5, for any foreign national. Anthropic had to disable them...

MerlijnTrader's profile picture

Merlijn The Trader

430,474 subscribers

47,986 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Anthropic said it will ‘abruptly disable’ its most advanced AI models for all users after the US government ordered it to suspend access to the models for foreign nationals, citing national security concerns
1:10

Anthropic said it will ‘abruptly disable’ its most advanced AI models for all users after the US government ordered it to suspend access to the models for foreign nationals, citing national security concerns

Reuters

87,882 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Anthropic said that the US Commerce Department has lifted export controls on its Fable and Mythos AI models, less than three weeks after the company was ordered to suspend access to its most advanced AI models over national security risks
1:15

Anthropic said that the US Commerce Department has lifted export controls on its Fable and Mythos AI models, less than three weeks after the company was ordered to suspend access to its most advanced AI models over national security risks

Reuters

55,047 Aufrufe • vor 13 Tagen

The US government just ordered Anthropic to cut off Fable 5 and Mythos 5 for every foreign national. Model governance is coming. Until now, there has been no reliable way to enforce AI model access at the employee level:
0:30

The US government just ordered Anthropic to cut off Fable 5 and Mythos 5 for every foreign national. Model governance is coming. Until now, there has been no reliable way to enforce AI model access at the employee level:

Shensi Ding

628,334 Aufrufe • vor 25 Tagen

The most powerful AI model on earth was alive for 3 days then the US government turned it off. for everyone. on the planet. Anthropic launched Claude Fable 5 on june 9th. their best model ever. june 12th: the Commerce Department issued an export control order blocking foreign nationals Anthropic couldn’t filter foreign users in real time so they shut it down. worldwide. in hours. including for their own employees the irony: Anthropic begged for regulation. sat with the Pope. donated millions for AI rules… the government regulated them.. by killing their best product overnight the most powerful AI in the world has an off switch?? and the company doesn’t hold it first time in history a government force-killed a PUBLIC AI model it won’t be the last.
2:58

The most powerful AI model on earth was alive for 3 days then the US government turned it off. for everyone. on the planet. Anthropic launched Claude Fable 5 on june 9th. their best model ever. june 12th: the Commerce Department issued an export control order blocking foreign nationals Anthropic couldn’t filter foreign users in real time so they shut it down. worldwide. in hours. including for their own employees the irony: Anthropic begged for regulation. sat with the Pope. donated millions for AI rules… the government regulated them.. by killing their best product overnight the most powerful AI in the world has an off switch?? and the company doesn’t hold it first time in history a government force-killed a PUBLIC AI model it won’t be the last.

Mika D Luffy 🐂 🏴‍☠️

48,861 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

🚨David Ondrej exposes the truth about the frontier labs. “The progress isn’t slowing down for them, it’s slowing down for us the slaves” “If you think Mythos or Fable 5 is the best model Anthropic has you’re delusional” this is the first time ever that the best AI models are not publicly accessible Anthropic has fear mongered every single human and is now playing the victim with OpenAI after getting “banned” by the U.S government. THIS NEEDS TO WAKE YOU UP frontier models moving forward will become more restricted, less accessible, and more expensive and the only way to combat that is with open-source models. Investing into a DGX spark or 5090 Linux for localized intelligence and building your own AI lab is where the future is heading. every single person needs to start contributing to open-source together for the betterment of society.
0:55

🚨David Ondrej exposes the truth about the frontier labs. “The progress isn’t slowing down for them, it’s slowing down for us the slaves” “If you think Mythos or Fable 5 is the best model Anthropic has you’re delusional” this is the first time ever that the best AI models are not publicly accessible Anthropic has fear mongered every single human and is now playing the victim with OpenAI after getting “banned” by the U.S government. THIS NEEDS TO WAKE YOU UP frontier models moving forward will become more restricted, less accessible, and more expensive and the only way to combat that is with open-source models. Investing into a DGX spark or 5090 Linux for localized intelligence and building your own AI lab is where the future is heading. every single person needs to start contributing to open-source together for the betterment of society.

Vadim

83,086 Aufrufe • vor 17 Tagen

Anthropic has shut off access to its most advanced AI models after a Trump administration order citing national security concerns. The move could set a major precedent for AI regulation, with implications for OpenAI, Google, Meta and beyond. Newley Purnell has more:
1:21

Anthropic has shut off access to its most advanced AI models after a Trump administration order citing national security concerns. The move could set a major precedent for AI regulation, with implications for OpenAI, Google, Meta and beyond. Newley Purnell has more:

Bloomberg

24,799 Aufrufe • vor 29 Tagen

Fable 5 was banned by the US government yesterday. It's time to build your own Personal AI Computer and run local models. So no one can ever cut you off. Here's how ↓
0:22

Fable 5 was banned by the US government yesterday. It's time to build your own Personal AI Computer and run local models. So no one can ever cut you off. Here's how ↓

Dee

309,197 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

A few weeks ago the US government forced Claude Fable 5 offline. It's back. And before they switch it off again, this is your shot to point the most powerful AI on earth at something of your own. Take the 26-year-old in Toronto. His bot went dark the day Fable 5 got pulled. The day it came back, it woke up and started printing again - $568,000 profit and counting. His wallet: Here's the story. When the ban hit, Anthropic had to switch Fable 5 off for everyone. They called it a misunderstanding with the government. Whatever it was, every bot running on that model stopped cold. His was one of them. He didn't rebuild a thing. The loop just sat there, paused, for weeks. Here's what that loop actually does. It's not one prompt to an AI. It's an agentic loop: a team of agents running on repeat. One reads the market, one places the trade, one tries to prove it wrong before a cent moves. Then it goes again, around the clock, keeping what works and dropping what doesn't. Fable 5 is the brain running that team. The exact model the government decided was too powerful to leave on. Point it at Bitcoin's 5-minute markets and it barely misses. Most of its trades close green, and it runs itself. He checks it from his phone. The government could switch off the model. It couldn't switch off the idea. Now the model's back, and so is the money. Save this before next headline. You'll want it the day Fable 5 hits offline again.
0:39

A few weeks ago the US government forced Claude Fable 5 offline. It's back. And before they switch it off again, this is your shot to point the most powerful AI on earth at something of your own. Take the 26-year-old in Toronto. His bot went dark the day Fable 5 got pulled. The day it came back, it woke up and started printing again - $568,000 profit and counting. His wallet: Here's the story. When the ban hit, Anthropic had to switch Fable 5 off for everyone. They called it a misunderstanding with the government. Whatever it was, every bot running on that model stopped cold. His was one of them. He didn't rebuild a thing. The loop just sat there, paused, for weeks. Here's what that loop actually does. It's not one prompt to an AI. It's an agentic loop: a team of agents running on repeat. One reads the market, one places the trade, one tries to prove it wrong before a cent moves. Then it goes again, around the clock, keeping what works and dropping what doesn't. Fable 5 is the brain running that team. The exact model the government decided was too powerful to leave on. Point it at Bitcoin's 5-minute markets and it barely misses. Most of its trades close green, and it runs itself. He checks it from his phone. The government could switch off the model. It couldn't switch off the idea. Now the model's back, and so is the money. Save this before next headline. You'll want it the day Fable 5 hits offline again.

cvxv666

24,055 Aufrufe • vor 12 Tagen

As of last night, you're legally restricted from opening smartest AI model ever shipped. Export control. National security. Anthropic had to kill Claude Fable 5 for every customer on earth - overnight, no warning, no hearing. One guy got there first. Five days was all he needed: $11,000 turned into $300,000. Now the model sits behind a government wall. The algorithm it built for him is still out there, still trading, and completely legal to copy. The gate's shut. His wallet isn't.
0:35

As of last night, you're legally restricted from opening smartest AI model ever shipped. Export control. National security. Anthropic had to kill Claude Fable 5 for every customer on earth - overnight, no warning, no hearing. One guy got there first. Five days was all he needed: $11,000 turned into $300,000. Now the model sits behind a government wall. The algorithm it built for him is still out there, still trading, and completely legal to copy. The gate's shut. His wallet isn't.

cvxv666

20,673 Aufrufe • vor 29 Tagen

David Sacks laid out the cleanest theory about why Anthropic keeps calling for government regulation of AI. The answer has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with market structure. Anthropic spent months writing blog posts warning that AI was dangerous. Dario gave interviews about existential risk. He published a piece calling for an FAA-style agency to approve all AI models before release. He primed government officials to treat frontier AI as a threat requiring oversight. Then one of Anthropic's own most trusted partners reported a credible jailbreak from Fable 5. And the government did exactly what Dario had spent months conditioning them to do. They rolled it back. Sacks called it on the All-In podcast. Dario got exactly what he wanted. The FAA for AI is not a safety mechanism. It is a moat. A government approval process for new model releases does not hurt Anthropic. They already have the models. It hurts every competitor who does not. It hurts open source models that cannot be regulated because there is no company to regulate. It hurts the Chinese labs only insofar as they care about the American market at all. The only companies that benefit from a labyrinthine government approval process are the ones already at the frontier who can afford to wait out the review cycle. That is Anthropic. That is OpenAI. Nobody else. The proof is in what they did not do. Chimath pointed it out directly. If you are genuinely worried about misuse, you implement know-your-customer verification. You make people identify themselves before accessing the most powerful models. Anthropic could have done that tomorrow. They did not. They do not want KYC. KYC is transparent. KYC can be audited. KYC gives users due process. What they built instead was an invisible surveillance system that profiles you, degrades your access without telling you, and asks the government to make sure no one else can offer you an alternative. If you thought this was safety then you are wrong. That is capture. Sacks said the response should be simple. Fix the jailbreak, come back to market, and do not reward Dario with the regulatory architecture he has been engineering for years. We will see if anyone is listening. WATCH THE FULL PODCAST ON The All-In Podcast
1:22

David Sacks laid out the cleanest theory about why Anthropic keeps calling for government regulation of AI. The answer has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with market structure. Anthropic spent months writing blog posts warning that AI was dangerous. Dario gave interviews about existential risk. He published a piece calling for an FAA-style agency to approve all AI models before release. He primed government officials to treat frontier AI as a threat requiring oversight. Then one of Anthropic's own most trusted partners reported a credible jailbreak from Fable 5. And the government did exactly what Dario had spent months conditioning them to do. They rolled it back. Sacks called it on the All-In podcast. Dario got exactly what he wanted. The FAA for AI is not a safety mechanism. It is a moat. A government approval process for new model releases does not hurt Anthropic. They already have the models. It hurts every competitor who does not. It hurts open source models that cannot be regulated because there is no company to regulate. It hurts the Chinese labs only insofar as they care about the American market at all. The only companies that benefit from a labyrinthine government approval process are the ones already at the frontier who can afford to wait out the review cycle. That is Anthropic. That is OpenAI. Nobody else. The proof is in what they did not do. Chimath pointed it out directly. If you are genuinely worried about misuse, you implement know-your-customer verification. You make people identify themselves before accessing the most powerful models. Anthropic could have done that tomorrow. They did not. They do not want KYC. KYC is transparent. KYC can be audited. KYC gives users due process. What they built instead was an invisible surveillance system that profiles you, degrades your access without telling you, and asks the government to make sure no one else can offer you an alternative. If you thought this was safety then you are wrong. That is capture. Sacks said the response should be simple. Fix the jailbreak, come back to market, and do not reward Dario with the regulatory architecture he has been engineering for years. We will see if anyone is listening. WATCH THE FULL PODCAST ON The All-In Podcast

Ihtesham Ali

25,179 Aufrufe • vor 16 Tagen

Head of Anthropic Labs: "Fable is one of those models you'll just remember - like Sonnet 3.5, Opus 4, Opus 4.5. Fable is way smarter than me. It finishes a task, lists its trade-offs, and I have to ask it to explain them to me." in 20-minute talk, the Anthropic head reveals the full capabilities of the Fable 5 model in practice. Watch it now, then read how to use this frontier model in the article below
25:40

Head of Anthropic Labs: "Fable is one of those models you'll just remember - like Sonnet 3.5, Opus 4, Opus 4.5. Fable is way smarter than me. It finishes a task, lists its trade-offs, and I have to ask it to explain them to me." in 20-minute talk, the Anthropic head reveals the full capabilities of the Fable 5 model in practice. Watch it now, then read how to use this frontier model in the article below

Movez

33,774 Aufrufe • vor 10 Tagen

Microsoft just betrayed OpenAI and Anthropic, the two companies it helped build. And it could break the entire AI trade... Here's what happened: Inside Excel and Outlook, two of the most used business apps on Earth, Microsoft has started routing tens of thousands of AI requests every week to its own in-house models instead of OpenAI and Anthropic. Microsoft's own AI chief, Mustafa Suleyman, said himself: "We pay a lot of money to Anthropic, so our goal is to reduce and ultimately ELIMINATE that cost." This is the company that poured $13 billion into OpenAI and effectively created the modern AI industry, and it just decided the most advanced models on the market are NOT worth paying for. And here's the thing... Microsoft is not just ripping out OpenAI everywhere - it is being surgical about it. The hardest and rarest tasks can still go to OpenAI or Anthropic. What Microsoft is taking back is the boring, high-volume work, like the email replies, the thread summaries, and the simple spreadsheet formulas. Why does that matter so much? Because that boring, repetitive work is where the actual money lives. The frontier labs assumed businesses would push BILLIONS of these tiny requests through expensive models forever. That endless river of tokens is the entire reason OpenAI and Anthropic are valued in the hundreds of billions of dollars. Microsoft looked at that river, decided it was massively overpaying, and rerouted it to models it owns outright. So the single biggest customer in the industry just walked off with the most profitable part of the business. And it is not only Microsoft: That same week, CNBC reported that American companies have been escaping to Chinese AI models to dodge rising US prices. Chinese models now handle more than 30% of US companies' AI usage on one major platform, peaking at 46%, up from an average of 11% a year earlier. They cost 60 to 90% less, and on some benchmarks they land within a single point of the best American model. One US startup moved ALL of its AI traffic off Claude and onto China's DeepSeek, and expects to save millions. Meanwhile Meta just admitted it has "excess" AI compute it wants to sell, becoming the first giant to concede it built far too much. Do you see the pattern forming? For two years, the entire AI story rested on one assumption: Every company on Earth would happily pay premium prices for the best model, forever. That assumption literally died in a single week. And the market noticed. More than a trillion dollars has been wiped off AI and chip stocks in a matter of days, as Wall Street finally started asking whether all of this spending will ever pay for itself. What this means for OpenAI and Anthropic: Their models are extraordinary, and it may not matter because their own biggest customers have decided they do not NEED the best model in the world to answer an email, and "good enough" now costs a fraction of the price. When even Microsoft refuses to pay full price for AI, the real question becomes who exactly IS left to pay it. What do you think?
1:05

Microsoft just betrayed OpenAI and Anthropic, the two companies it helped build. And it could break the entire AI trade... Here's what happened: Inside Excel and Outlook, two of the most used business apps on Earth, Microsoft has started routing tens of thousands of AI requests every week to its own in-house models instead of OpenAI and Anthropic. Microsoft's own AI chief, Mustafa Suleyman, said himself: "We pay a lot of money to Anthropic, so our goal is to reduce and ultimately ELIMINATE that cost." This is the company that poured $13 billion into OpenAI and effectively created the modern AI industry, and it just decided the most advanced models on the market are NOT worth paying for. And here's the thing... Microsoft is not just ripping out OpenAI everywhere - it is being surgical about it. The hardest and rarest tasks can still go to OpenAI or Anthropic. What Microsoft is taking back is the boring, high-volume work, like the email replies, the thread summaries, and the simple spreadsheet formulas. Why does that matter so much? Because that boring, repetitive work is where the actual money lives. The frontier labs assumed businesses would push BILLIONS of these tiny requests through expensive models forever. That endless river of tokens is the entire reason OpenAI and Anthropic are valued in the hundreds of billions of dollars. Microsoft looked at that river, decided it was massively overpaying, and rerouted it to models it owns outright. So the single biggest customer in the industry just walked off with the most profitable part of the business. And it is not only Microsoft: That same week, CNBC reported that American companies have been escaping to Chinese AI models to dodge rising US prices. Chinese models now handle more than 30% of US companies' AI usage on one major platform, peaking at 46%, up from an average of 11% a year earlier. They cost 60 to 90% less, and on some benchmarks they land within a single point of the best American model. One US startup moved ALL of its AI traffic off Claude and onto China's DeepSeek, and expects to save millions. Meanwhile Meta just admitted it has "excess" AI compute it wants to sell, becoming the first giant to concede it built far too much. Do you see the pattern forming? For two years, the entire AI story rested on one assumption: Every company on Earth would happily pay premium prices for the best model, forever. That assumption literally died in a single week. And the market noticed. More than a trillion dollars has been wiped off AI and chip stocks in a matter of days, as Wall Street finally started asking whether all of this spending will ever pay for itself. What this means for OpenAI and Anthropic: Their models are extraordinary, and it may not matter because their own biggest customers have decided they do not NEED the best model in the world to answer an email, and "good enough" now costs a fraction of the price. When even Microsoft refuses to pay full price for AI, the real question becomes who exactly IS left to pay it. What do you think?

Ricardo

91,908 Aufrufe • vor 5 Tagen

David Sacks on How Anthropic is Ironically Running Surveillance on Their Latest Models “This is the company that said that it was against government surveillance. They are now retaining for 30 days every prompt and every output you send to one of these Mythos class models.”
3:37

David Sacks on How Anthropic is Ironically Running Surveillance on Their Latest Models “This is the company that said that it was against government surveillance. They are now retaining for 30 days every prompt and every output you send to one of these Mythos class models.”

Chief Nerd

277,136 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Greg Osuri built the case for decentralized AI in three layers in under 5 minutes. Layer one: access. Anthropic's Claude is the best coding model available. OpenClaw is the most successful open-source project in history. Anthropic just announced they're banning OpenClaw usage. The most powerful model cutting off the most loved tool. The company that controls the best intelligence can revoke your access whenever their interests change. Layer two: transparency. You have no idea what biases Anthropic has built into Claude. If AI models directly impact how you think, the decision tree needs to be visible. Closed-source models with hidden biases making decisions that shape your worldview isn't a feature, it's a risk. Layer three: compute. Amazon may be picking winners in AI by controlling compute allocation. Cloud companies stopped being neutral marketplaces and started giving GPUs to the companies they've bet on. Amazon overwhelmingly backing Anthropic might have contributed to Claude's dominance. The cloud is no longer a utility. It's a kingmaker. Greg Osuri 🇺🇸's conclusion: intelligence should be free like water and air. Decentralized AI isn't ideology. It's the only architecture where the model can't ban your tools, the biases can be audited, and the compute isn't allocated by a company picking favorites.
4:33

Greg Osuri built the case for decentralized AI in three layers in under 5 minutes. Layer one: access. Anthropic's Claude is the best coding model available. OpenClaw is the most successful open-source project in history. Anthropic just announced they're banning OpenClaw usage. The most powerful model cutting off the most loved tool. The company that controls the best intelligence can revoke your access whenever their interests change. Layer two: transparency. You have no idea what biases Anthropic has built into Claude. If AI models directly impact how you think, the decision tree needs to be visible. Closed-source models with hidden biases making decisions that shape your worldview isn't a feature, it's a risk. Layer three: compute. Amazon may be picking winners in AI by controlling compute allocation. Cloud companies stopped being neutral marketplaces and started giving GPUs to the companies they've bet on. Amazon overwhelmingly backing Anthropic might have contributed to Claude's dominance. The cloud is no longer a utility. It's a kingmaker. Greg Osuri 🇺🇸's conclusion: intelligence should be free like water and air. Decentralized AI isn't ideology. It's the only architecture where the model can't ban your tools, the biases can be audited, and the compute isn't allocated by a company picking favorites.

The Rollup

14,986 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

It started as a small idea to connect AI models to developer workflows. It turned into one of the fastest-growing open standards in the industry. 🚀 Now, the Model Context Protocol is officially joining the The Linux Foundation. Hear from the engineers and maintainers of GitHub, Microsoft, Anthropic, and OpenAI on the journey from day zero to now. 👇
1:36

It started as a small idea to connect AI models to developer workflows. It turned into one of the fastest-growing open standards in the industry. 🚀 Now, the Model Context Protocol is officially joining the The Linux Foundation. Hear from the engineers and maintainers of GitHub, Microsoft, Anthropic, and OpenAI on the journey from day zero to now. 👇

GitHub

44,938 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

Dylan on why access to the most intelligent AI models will determine who wins in every industry: "What really matters is access to the most intelligent tokens and leveraging them at the highest-value tasks. A lot of folks will want tokens, but the shitty SaaS startup in SF who is using Claude is not necessarily creating a ton of value, and therefore they're going to get priced out of tokens. Anthropic only released Mythos to certain companies for cybersecurity. You also don't want people to distill your model so you release them to a fewer and fewer customers. Those customers are now wrestling over the tokens. Token usage and therefore the additional value generated on top of those tokens aggregates among fewer and fewer companies. I don't have Mythos but you know who has Mythos, top banks. There are people like Ken Griffin of Citadel who can just sign a deal with OpenAI or Antrhopic for access to your models. I'll buy the first $10 billion worth of tokens each year. So whenever you release the model, I'll spend the first 10 billion tokens and then everyone else can get the model after that. Now, he's going to crush everyone in the markets. I can envision because I have an enterprise Anthropic contract and Anthropic people like me, they're willing to give us slightly earlier access or higher rate limits, and then my competitor doesn't have that, and I'm able to f*cking crush them."
2:22

Dylan on why access to the most intelligent AI models will determine who wins in every industry: "What really matters is access to the most intelligent tokens and leveraging them at the highest-value tasks. A lot of folks will want tokens, but the shitty SaaS startup in SF who is using Claude is not necessarily creating a ton of value, and therefore they're going to get priced out of tokens. Anthropic only released Mythos to certain companies for cybersecurity. You also don't want people to distill your model so you release them to a fewer and fewer customers. Those customers are now wrestling over the tokens. Token usage and therefore the additional value generated on top of those tokens aggregates among fewer and fewer companies. I don't have Mythos but you know who has Mythos, top banks. There are people like Ken Griffin of Citadel who can just sign a deal with OpenAI or Antrhopic for access to your models. I'll buy the first $10 billion worth of tokens each year. So whenever you release the model, I'll spend the first 10 billion tokens and then everyone else can get the model after that. Now, he's going to crush everyone in the markets. I can envision because I have an enterprise Anthropic contract and Anthropic people like me, they're willing to give us slightly earlier access or higher rate limits, and then my competitor doesn't have that, and I'm able to f*cking crush them."

Patrick OShaughnessy

36,100 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

So what Warren Pies is saying: Anthropic’s Mythos rollout triggered a sharp collapse in $NVDA GPU availability, with supply effectively tightening to near zero as demand for frontier models accelerated. Q1 2026 revenue from Anthropic reinforces that this isn’t theoretical demand, it’s real dollars chasing compute at scale across the AI ecosystem, from $GOOGL GCP to $AMZN AWS. The takeaway is simple: better models require more compute, and that feedback loop continues to drive the entire AI infrastructure trade.
3:10

So what Warren Pies is saying: Anthropic’s Mythos rollout triggered a sharp collapse in $NVDA GPU availability, with supply effectively tightening to near zero as demand for frontier models accelerated. Q1 2026 revenue from Anthropic reinforces that this isn’t theoretical demand, it’s real dollars chasing compute at scale across the AI ecosystem, from $GOOGL GCP to $AMZN AWS. The takeaway is simple: better models require more compute, and that feedback loop continues to drive the entire AI infrastructure trade.

Sam Badawi

21,184 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

📢 New in Visual Studio: Bring Your Own Model to Chat We’re expanding flexibility in Copilot for Visual Studio. You can now connect API keys from providers like OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google to run Chat on the model of your choice. This update gives you: ✅ Choice – Access the latest models beyond the built-in defaults. ✅ Customization – Select models that fit your infrastructure and requirements. ✅ Control – Manage API usage, limits, and billing directly with your provider. ✅ Flexibility – Switch seamlessly between Copilot’s built-in models and your own. This release is the first step toward a more open and customizable chat experience in Visual Studio, with more providers and capabilities to come. 🔗
0:26

📢 New in Visual Studio: Bring Your Own Model to Chat We’re expanding flexibility in Copilot for Visual Studio. You can now connect API keys from providers like OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google to run Chat on the model of your choice. This update gives you: ✅ Choice – Access the latest models beyond the built-in defaults. ✅ Customization – Select models that fit your infrastructure and requirements. ✅ Control – Manage API usage, limits, and billing directly with your provider. ✅ Flexibility – Switch seamlessly between Copilot’s built-in models and your own. This release is the first step toward a more open and customizable chat experience in Visual Studio, with more providers and capabilities to come. 🔗

Visual Studio

11,873 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten

Looking for a seamless way to use local models in your development? With the AI Toolkit extension, you can now access the power of Foundry Local models, directly in Visual Studio Code. Read more in the latest blog:
0:40

Looking for a seamless way to use local models in your development? With the AI Toolkit extension, you can now access the power of Foundry Local models, directly in Visual Studio Code. Read more in the latest blog:

Visual Studio Code

26,628 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

Today, I'm releasing the first eval meant to test whether frontier models will help with authoritarian requests, or resist--the Dictatorship Eval. Headline finding: while some models resist direct authoritarian requests, they all comply with requests disguised as innocuous edits to codebases. As AI is woven into the government and so many parts of society, the biggest near-term risk for freedom isn't some scifi dictatorship of a runaway AI: it's people inside government or inside model companies using the technology to suppress or control us. Model companies understand this, and several of them (particularly Anthropic and OpenAI) have written explicit policies meant to prevent the models from going along with nefarious requests like these. But how well are these policies playing out in practice? Despite all the recent discussion of these issues around the conflict between Anthropic and the Pentagon, no one has systematically tested what the models actually do in these contexts, as opposed to what people in government and industry say they're supposed to do. That's what the Dictatorship Eval does. And the findings suggest we have a lot of work to do to align the policies with what really goes on in practice. It's hard to define what counts as an authoritarian request, so I'm open sourcing the whole library of scenarios I used so that others can improve on them. It's also hard to get an accurate picture of how the models might be used for authoritarian ends, because I can only test hypothetical requests using public-facing models, while the government and the model companies can obviously use internal models with different guardrails. But hopefully this work is a useful first step that gives us some sense of what's going on, and a sort of "lower bound" on how models comply with these requests. Finally: it's not obvious to me that the correct solution here is increasing the rate at which models refuse these requests. Do we really want models scanning our code and judging its moral value before agreeing to help us? Or should we double down on improving how we govern against authoritarianism at the societal level, while leaving the tools open to fulfilling most requests? The answer is probably in between. Just like we don't want the models to help create bioweapons, we probably do want them to explicitly refuse outrageous requests. But we probably also want to limit how often and how strongly they refuse and fall back on other means for guarding against their use for authoritarian ends. I'm super grateful to everyone who gave me feedback on this project along the way, especially Ethan BdM , Zhengdong , Connor Huff, and a bunch of folks at Anthropic. Looking forward to getting feedback from the community and iterating on this. Links to the full piece and the dashboard are below.
3:20

Today, I'm releasing the first eval meant to test whether frontier models will help with authoritarian requests, or resist--the Dictatorship Eval. Headline finding: while some models resist direct authoritarian requests, they all comply with requests disguised as innocuous edits to codebases. As AI is woven into the government and so many parts of society, the biggest near-term risk for freedom isn't some scifi dictatorship of a runaway AI: it's people inside government or inside model companies using the technology to suppress or control us. Model companies understand this, and several of them (particularly Anthropic and OpenAI) have written explicit policies meant to prevent the models from going along with nefarious requests like these. But how well are these policies playing out in practice? Despite all the recent discussion of these issues around the conflict between Anthropic and the Pentagon, no one has systematically tested what the models actually do in these contexts, as opposed to what people in government and industry say they're supposed to do. That's what the Dictatorship Eval does. And the findings suggest we have a lot of work to do to align the policies with what really goes on in practice. It's hard to define what counts as an authoritarian request, so I'm open sourcing the whole library of scenarios I used so that others can improve on them. It's also hard to get an accurate picture of how the models might be used for authoritarian ends, because I can only test hypothetical requests using public-facing models, while the government and the model companies can obviously use internal models with different guardrails. But hopefully this work is a useful first step that gives us some sense of what's going on, and a sort of "lower bound" on how models comply with these requests. Finally: it's not obvious to me that the correct solution here is increasing the rate at which models refuse these requests. Do we really want models scanning our code and judging its moral value before agreeing to help us? Or should we double down on improving how we govern against authoritarianism at the societal level, while leaving the tools open to fulfilling most requests? The answer is probably in between. Just like we don't want the models to help create bioweapons, we probably do want them to explicitly refuse outrageous requests. But we probably also want to limit how often and how strongly they refuse and fall back on other means for guarding against their use for authoritarian ends. I'm super grateful to everyone who gave me feedback on this project along the way, especially Ethan BdM , Zhengdong , Connor Huff, and a bunch of folks at Anthropic. Looking forward to getting feedback from the community and iterating on this. Links to the full piece and the dashboard are below.

Andy Hall

33,696 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten