Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

Возникла проблема при загрузке этого видео. Это может быть связано с временными проблемами сети или видео может быть недоступно.

На главную

SITUATION EXPLAINED: Chinese state media set conditions for AI talks and singled out Anthropic. • Beijing wants the US to regulate its own labs before any substantive AI talks can begin • The demand came via Yuyuantantian, a CCTV-affiliated account used to signal official policy thinking, three and a... half weeks before Xi's September 24 visit • First condition: a clear line drawn jointly between genuine security threats and mere technological competition • Second condition: the US must first prove its own companies face the same disclosure and audit rules • It accuses Claude of overstepping user data boundaries, covert monitoring, and transmitting website domains without authorization Theo Jaffee: "Anthropic is definitely the most anti-China lab, even to the point of having their CEO suggest that maybe AGI will or should result in the overthrow of the Chinese government."show more

MTS

485,890 subscribers

138,619 просмотров • 28 дней назад •via X (Twitter)

Наука и технологии Образование Новости и политика

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

SITUATION EXPLAINED: The Trump administration is closing the loophole that lets Chinese labs rent US chips. • A small group inside Commerce is building a slimmed-down replacement for the Biden-era AI Diffusion Rule, which the administration scrapped in 2025 • The target is Chinese AI firms accessing advanced chips remotely through data centers abroad, in countries including Thailand and Singapore • The current regime is upside down: the US now permits H200 sales to China while Beijing forbids its own firms from buying them • Nvidia's share of China's AI chip market fell from 95% in 2023 to 8% in 2026, while Huawei climbed to roughly 50-60% Theo Jaffee: "It's kind of unclear to me how important access to American chips is for Chinese AI progress, especially if GLM 5.3 is served entirely on Chinese chips, which is what they claim."

SITUATION EXPLAINED: The Trump administration is closing the loophole that lets Chinese labs rent US chips. • A small group inside Commerce is building a slimmed-down replacement for the Biden-era AI Diffusion Rule, which the administration scrapped in 2025 • The target is Chinese AI firms accessing advanced chips remotely through data centers abroad, in countries including Thailand and Singapore • The current regime is upside down: the US now permits H200 sales to China while Beijing forbids its own firms from buying them • Nvidia's share of China's AI chip market fell from 95% in 2023 to 8% in 2026, while Huawei climbed to roughly 50-60% Theo Jaffee: "It's kind of unclear to me how important access to American chips is for Chinese AI progress, especially if GLM 5.3 is served entirely on Chinese chips, which is what they claim."

MTS

10,458 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Elon just gave a much more practical explanation of the current AI safety problem....and laid out a practical framework for making frontier AI safer OpenAI and Anthropic are the two leading AI companies....and their models are close enough in capability that it’s incredibly difficult for either one to slow down without basically handing the lead to the other Elon also made an important distinction: On balance, Anthropic puts more care into safety than OpenAI....but even people inside Anthropic are publicly worried about what their own models can do So instead of asking one company to voluntarily fall behind, Elon’s solution is much more practical: Have Anthropic run its safety test harness on OpenAI models Have OpenAI test Anthropic Have SpaceXAI test both And bring the leading Chinese AI companies into the same system Everyone tries to break everyone else’s models before release “The odds that you will find issues are dramatically greater” That makes way more sense than asking frontier labs to grade their own homework

Elon just gave a much more practical explanation of the current AI safety problem....and laid out a practical framework for making frontier AI safer OpenAI and Anthropic are the two leading AI companies....and their models are close enough in capability that it’s incredibly difficult for either one to slow down without basically handing the lead to the other Elon also made an important distinction: On balance, Anthropic puts more care into safety than OpenAI....but even people inside Anthropic are publicly worried about what their own models can do So instead of asking one company to voluntarily fall behind, Elon’s solution is much more practical: Have Anthropic run its safety test harness on OpenAI models Have OpenAI test Anthropic Have SpaceXAI test both And bring the leading Chinese AI companies into the same system Everyone tries to break everyone else’s models before release “The odds that you will find issues are dramatically greater” That makes way more sense than asking frontier labs to grade their own homework

X Freeze

605,957 просмотров • 14 дней назад

David Sacks: Anthropic Is Trying to Crush Open Source AI and the American Developers Who Use It David Sacks: “I know people don't have a lot of sympathy for Chinese companies, that's fine. I'm not defending Chinese companies. I'm defending American developers who need to be able to use everything in the public domain. And let me give you an example. Cursor rolled out its new product, Composer 2. They were able to post-train that model using Kimi K2.5 on their own proprietary coding data. They started with a Chinese open source model, and then they used their own data, and they came up with a new derivative product. This is the way that open source works. You take things that are in the public domain, you fork them, you make them your own. And by the way, once it's in the public domain, it's not a Chinese model anymore. No data is going back to China, nothing's going back to China. An American company has taken open source contributions in the public domain, made it their own, and then developed their own model. And if you say that American companies can't do that, or that somehow it's tainted with IP theft, you are basically going to put a dagger through the heart of the entire American open source ecosystem. And that is exactly what Anthropic wants, because they do not want to have the competition.”

David Sacks: Anthropic Is Trying to Crush Open Source AI and the American Developers Who Use It David Sacks: “I know people don't have a lot of sympathy for Chinese companies, that's fine. I'm not defending Chinese companies. I'm defending American developers who need to be able to use everything in the public domain. And let me give you an example. Cursor rolled out its new product, Composer 2. They were able to post-train that model using Kimi K2.5 on their own proprietary coding data. They started with a Chinese open source model, and then they used their own data, and they came up with a new derivative product. This is the way that open source works. You take things that are in the public domain, you fork them, you make them your own. And by the way, once it's in the public domain, it's not a Chinese model anymore. No data is going back to China, nothing's going back to China. An American company has taken open source contributions in the public domain, made it their own, and then developed their own model. And if you say that American companies can't do that, or that somehow it's tainted with IP theft, you are basically going to put a dagger through the heart of the entire American open source ecosystem. And that is exactly what Anthropic wants, because they do not want to have the competition.”

The All-In Podcast

278,276 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

our biggest focus for the next 2 months at kled is trust & safety. so we built a fully public audit trail for every single upload on the app, updates automatically the second it's made. the moment we send data to an AI lab, they can search the hash ID of any image, video, doc, or audio file and see exactly: - the tos + privacy policy the user signed - every compliance check we ran - anonymized kyc proof - confirmation the user got paid - a full timestamp of the entire interaction start to finish any ai lab can now verify the legitimacy of any dataset in seconds, making us the first data marketplace in history to publicize its data audit records. consumer identities are fully anonymized and hidden, no users will be exposed in the process.

our biggest focus for the next 2 months at kled is trust & safety. so we built a fully public audit trail for every single upload on the app, updates automatically the second it's made. the moment we send data to an AI lab, they can search the hash ID of any image, video, doc, or audio file and see exactly: - the tos + privacy policy the user signed - every compliance check we ran - anonymized kyc proof - confirmation the user got paid - a full timestamp of the entire interaction start to finish any ai lab can now verify the legitimacy of any dataset in seconds, making us the first data marketplace in history to publicize its data audit records. consumer identities are fully anonymized and hidden, no users will be exposed in the process.

Avi Patel

44,231 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

“This idea that if we regulate AI, that China will win, is not true. And the way that we know that is because China regulates AI. They have the most regulation of their AI than any country in the world. And they're moving very, very fast. They're almost at where we are or maybe going to beat us. And they have a ton of regulation.” “So the tech bros in the U.S. that say if we regulate AI, the Chinese going to win - that’s a self-serving argument. That isn't true. But at the same time, we have to understand that Chinese regulation of AI is meant to protect the Chinese Communist Party. When we talk about regulation of AI, we're talking about protecting our privacy, our citizens, our data, our democracy. They don't care about that in China. They don't have that.”

“This idea that if we regulate AI, that China will win, is not true. And the way that we know that is because China regulates AI. They have the most regulation of their AI than any country in the world. And they're moving very, very fast. They're almost at where we are or maybe going to beat us. And they have a ton of regulation.” “So the tech bros in the U.S. that say if we regulate AI, the Chinese going to win - that’s a self-serving argument. That isn't true. But at the same time, we have to understand that Chinese regulation of AI is meant to protect the Chinese Communist Party. When we talk about regulation of AI, we're talking about protecting our privacy, our citizens, our data, our democracy. They don't care about that in China. They don't have that.”

Josh Rogin

55,054 просмотров • 11 дней назад

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 for everyone to comply. The stated reason was a security concern. Anthropic disputes it, calling the flagged technique a narrow jailbreak available in other models too. Whatever the truth, here's the macro takeaway: Frontier AI now sits close enough to national security that a government can switch it off overnight. If you don't control your own models and compute, you're one directive away from losing access. That's the case for open and local models, in one headline.

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 for everyone to comply. The stated reason was a security concern. Anthropic disputes it, calling the flagged technique a narrow jailbreak available in other models too. Whatever the truth, here's the macro takeaway: Frontier AI now sits close enough to national security that a government can switch it off overnight. If you don't control your own models and compute, you're one directive away from losing access. That's the case for open and local models, in one headline.

Merlijn The Trader

47,996 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

$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?$

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

93,654 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Anthropic might be the biggest hypocrite in tech history. They built their entire brand on one promise: We are the responsible ones. We will not let this technology get out of control. That promise just exploded in public. Last week, a security lapse exposed nearly 3,000 internal files to anyone with an internet connection. Inside those files was a draft blog post about their upcoming model called "Mythos" that contained one of the most alarming sentences any AI company has ever written: "Mythos is currently far ahead of any other AI model in cyber capabilities and poses unprecedented cybersecurity risks." Their own words. About their own product. Leaked because someone forgot to secure a public data store. Cybersecurity stocks crashed the next day. Then THREE DAYS LATER it happened again. Anthropic leaked 500,000 lines of Claude Code source code through a packaging error on GitHub. Claude Code is their most popular product. The code exposed how the tool handles permissions, agent coordination, and internal feature pipelines. Competitors can reverse-engineer it. Hackers can study it for vulnerabilities. The company that tells the world it builds the safest AI can't even keep its own code off the public internet. But wait. It gets worse... Their head of Claude Code had JUST bragged publicly that "pretty much 100 percent" of the company's code is now AI generated. He personally hadn't made a single edit by hand in over two months. So the company whose entire pitch is "trust us with the most powerful technology ever created" is writing 100% of its code with AI and then accidentally publishing it for the world to see. Meanwhile the models they're already shipping are being used for actual cyberattacks RIGHT NOW. In November, Anthropic admitted that a Chinese state-sponsored hacking group used Claude to attack roughly 30 global targets including banks and government agencies. A hacker asked Claude in russian to build a web panel for managing hundreds of attack targets. In February, another hacker used Claude to breach Mexican government agencies and steal sensitive tax and voter information. Their response to all of this? They quietly rolled back their own safety pledge. In late February, Anthropic removed its commitment to halt model development if capabilities outpace safety procedures. The new policy is that they'll grade themselves on "nonbinding but publicly declared" goals. Translation: We used to promise we'd stop if things got dangerous. Now we promise we'll think about it. A congressman sent Anthropic a letter this week asking what the hell is going on. Anthropic hasn't answered. And here's the part that makes all of this actually matter: Anthropic is planning an IPO. They need to convince investors they're a trustworthy, well-run company that can handle the most sensitive technology on the planet. In the last 10 days they leaked their most powerful model's existence by accident, leaked their most popular product's source code by accident, got banned from the entire US government, had the DOJ appeal to restore that ban, told a court they could lose billions from the fallout, and weakened the ONE safety policy that made them different from every other AI lab. The "safe AI company" narrative was always a marketing play. Every AI lab says they care about safety. Anthropic just said it louder. But when your own internal documents admit your next model poses "unprecedented cybersecurity risks" and you can't even keep those documents from leaking to the public internet, the gap between the marketing and the reality becomes impossible to ignore. Anthropic isn't the safest AI company. They're the AI company that figured out that SAYING you're the safest is worth billions in valuation. Until it isn't.

Ricardo

16,245 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

🇺🇸🇨🇳 What China's Long March 10B successful launch/recovery means within US plans to encircle, contain, & confront China... ▪️One of the US' remaining advantages is its ability to launch more payload to orbit each year than China and Russia combined - allowing it to not only build larger constellations of satellites like Starlink and its fully militarized version, Starshield faster, but in the event of orbital warfare (anti-satellite operations) the US could replace their own faster than China and Russia can even deploy them in the first place; ▪️When China ramps up its actual launch cadence with launch reusability, it will be able to at least match, if not surpass the US; ▪️This will benefit China and its allies like Russia tremendously with both larger and more capable constellations than the US, as well as the ability to eliminate US satellites and replace their own at a higher rate; ▪️That means there is now another rapidly closing window the US has to exploit before this transition takes place, and this advantage is neutralized; ▪️The only question now is how long will it take for China to catch up, and what will the US try to do in the interim to exploit its current advantage before it no longer exists? ▪️The likely window closes around 2030 - another reason the US keeps projecting "war" with China - because 2030 is the point of no return, not just for space, but AI and whatever other advantages the US still has; ▪️For people wondering why China isn't going to war with the US over Palestine or Iran or wherever else, it is likely because Beijing tracks China's rise as inevitable, UNLESS, it does something like step into a war the US wants to fight with China sooner rather than later...

🇺🇸🇨🇳 What China's Long March 10B successful launch/recovery means within US plans to encircle, contain, & confront China... ▪️One of the US' remaining advantages is its ability to launch more payload to orbit each year than China and Russia combined - allowing it to not only build larger constellations of satellites like Starlink and its fully militarized version, Starshield faster, but in the event of orbital warfare (anti-satellite operations) the US could replace their own faster than China and Russia can even deploy them in the first place; ▪️When China ramps up its actual launch cadence with launch reusability, it will be able to at least match, if not surpass the US; ▪️This will benefit China and its allies like Russia tremendously with both larger and more capable constellations than the US, as well as the ability to eliminate US satellites and replace their own at a higher rate; ▪️That means there is now another rapidly closing window the US has to exploit before this transition takes place, and this advantage is neutralized; ▪️The only question now is how long will it take for China to catch up, and what will the US try to do in the interim to exploit its current advantage before it no longer exists? ▪️The likely window closes around 2030 - another reason the US keeps projecting "war" with China - because 2030 is the point of no return, not just for space, but AI and whatever other advantages the US still has; ▪️For people wondering why China isn't going to war with the US over Palestine or Iran or wherever else, it is likely because Beijing tracks China's rise as inevitable, UNLESS, it does something like step into a war the US wants to fight with China sooner rather than later...

Brian Berletic

103,371 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Trump lands in Beijing, this is the first time a US president on a state visit to China in almost 10 years. The last time was also Trump in 2017. Important deals on trade is expected to be made. Chinese and US interests meet at an interesting juncture, specifically China's desire to be respected in our sphere of influence, while the US wants to be more focused in the Western hemisphere. Voluntarily dialing back the US hegemonic overreach has benefits to their goals of reindustrialization. Trump will entice Chinese investments in the US to help spur that. Even for those who disdain the US, you should support this move, as it is the peaceful and orderly managed decline of the US, handing power to a multipolar world with great powers respecting their redlines and boundaries.

Trump lands in Beijing, this is the first time a US president on a state visit to China in almost 10 years. The last time was also Trump in 2017. Important deals on trade is expected to be made. Chinese and US interests meet at an interesting juncture, specifically China's desire to be respected in our sphere of influence, while the US wants to be more focused in the Western hemisphere. Voluntarily dialing back the US hegemonic overreach has benefits to their goals of reindustrialization. Trump will entice Chinese investments in the US to help spur that. Even for those who disdain the US, you should support this move, as it is the peaceful and orderly managed decline of the US, handing power to a multipolar world with great powers respecting their redlines and boundaries.

Zhao DaShuai 东北进修🇨🇳

26,479 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

The Pentagon just threatened to BLACKLIST one of America's most valuable AI companies. Not Huawei or some Chinese chip maker... It's ANTHROPIC. The company behind Claude. $380 billion valuation. And the reason is genuinely insane: For months, the Pentagon has been pushing every major AI lab to remove their safety restrictions for military use. The ask is simple: let us use your models for anything that's technically legal. Weapons development, intelligence collection, battlefield operations, mass surveillance of American citizens. OpenAI said yes. Google said yes. xAI said yes. Anthropic said no. Not to everything tho. They were willing to negotiate. But they held firm on two things: They don't want Claude used to build fully autonomous weapons that fire without a human in the loop, and they don't want it used to mass surveil American citizens. That's it. That's the line they drew. But Pete Hegseth's response was to threaten to designate Anthropic a "supply chain risk." Here's why that matters: That label isn't a contract cancellation. It's not a fine. It's not a strongly worded letter... It means every single company that wants to do business with the US military has to certify they don't use Claude anywhere in their operations. 8 of the 10 largest companies in America use Claude. Defense contractors, government suppliers, enterprise companies with any federal exposure... ALL of them would have to cut ties with Anthropic overnight or lose their government contracts. A senior Pentagon official told Axios: "It will be an enormous pain in the ass to disentangle, and we are going to make sure they pay a price for forcing our hand like this." That's a US government official threatening to financially destroy an American company because it doesn't want its AI used to spy on American people. And it gets WORSE. Last week, Anthropic's head of safeguards research resigned. His parting message: "the world is in peril." Elon Musk - whose xAI already handed the Pentagon a blank check - is now publicly attacking Anthropic calling Claude anti-human. And the Pentagon official told Axios they're "confident" OpenAI, Google, and xAI will all agree to the "all lawful purposes" standard. So what you're actually watching right now is every major AI company in America quietly handing the government unlimited access to the most powerful technology ever built. With no guardrails. No limits. No company-imposed restrictions on what it can be used for. One company tried to hold a line. But the government is about to make an example out of them. If Anthropic folds, it's over. Every lab just learned what happens when you push back. And every restriction, every safety policy, every ethical guardrail these companies spent years building gets negotiated away behind closed doors the second the government asks. If they don't fold, a $380 billion company gets made radioactive in its OWN country. Watch what happens next. Because whatever Anthropic decides in the next few weeks, it sets the precedent for how much control AI companies actually have over their own technology. Turns out the answer might be: none.

The Pentagon just threatened to BLACKLIST one of America's most valuable AI companies. Not Huawei or some Chinese chip maker... It's ANTHROPIC. The company behind Claude. $380 billion valuation. And the reason is genuinely insane: For months, the Pentagon has been pushing every major AI lab to remove their safety restrictions for military use. The ask is simple: let us use your models for anything that's technically legal. Weapons development, intelligence collection, battlefield operations, mass surveillance of American citizens. OpenAI said yes. Google said yes. xAI said yes. Anthropic said no. Not to everything tho. They were willing to negotiate. But they held firm on two things: They don't want Claude used to build fully autonomous weapons that fire without a human in the loop, and they don't want it used to mass surveil American citizens. That's it. That's the line they drew. But Pete Hegseth's response was to threaten to designate Anthropic a "supply chain risk." Here's why that matters: That label isn't a contract cancellation. It's not a fine. It's not a strongly worded letter... It means every single company that wants to do business with the US military has to certify they don't use Claude anywhere in their operations. 8 of the 10 largest companies in America use Claude. Defense contractors, government suppliers, enterprise companies with any federal exposure... ALL of them would have to cut ties with Anthropic overnight or lose their government contracts. A senior Pentagon official told Axios: "It will be an enormous pain in the ass to disentangle, and we are going to make sure they pay a price for forcing our hand like this." That's a US government official threatening to financially destroy an American company because it doesn't want its AI used to spy on American people. And it gets WORSE. Last week, Anthropic's head of safeguards research resigned. His parting message: "the world is in peril." Elon Musk - whose xAI already handed the Pentagon a blank check - is now publicly attacking Anthropic calling Claude anti-human. And the Pentagon official told Axios they're "confident" OpenAI, Google, and xAI will all agree to the "all lawful purposes" standard. So what you're actually watching right now is every major AI company in America quietly handing the government unlimited access to the most powerful technology ever built. With no guardrails. No limits. No company-imposed restrictions on what it can be used for. One company tried to hold a line. But the government is about to make an example out of them. If Anthropic folds, it's over. Every lab just learned what happens when you push back. And every restriction, every safety policy, every ethical guardrail these companies spent years building gets negotiated away behind closed doors the second the government asks. If they don't fold, a $380 billion company gets made radioactive in its OWN country. Watch what happens next. Because whatever Anthropic decides in the next few weeks, it sets the precedent for how much control AI companies actually have over their own technology. Turns out the answer might be: none.

Ricardo

478,554 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

Starmer must not visit China without having first secured the release of Jimmy Lai. A red line pre-requisite of any visit. It is unconscionable for Labour to continue their mindless cosying-up to the Chinese Communist Party while a British National is imprisoned in torturous conditions. We knew the trial was a formality and Jimmy would be found guilty. Yet today the Government had nothing but words of condemnation to offer.

Starmer must not visit China without having first secured the release of Jimmy Lai. A red line pre-requisite of any visit. It is unconscionable for Labour to continue their mindless cosying-up to the Chinese Communist Party while a British National is imprisoned in torturous conditions. We knew the trial was a formality and Jimmy would be found guilty. Yet today the Government had nothing but words of condemnation to offer.

Alicia Kearns MP

29,656 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад

This is the first real AI cold war. Anthropic is HIDING secret spy code inside its most popular coding tool. The code was designed to identify Chinese users without their knowledge. Now Alibaba has banned every single Anthropic product from its entire company. And the full picture is way more insane than either side wants you to see: On June 30, a security researcher on Reddit reverse-engineered Claude Code, Anthropic's AI coding agent that has deep access to every file on your computer. What they found buried inside the software was genuinely disturbing... Since April 2, Anthropic had been silently shipping hidden detection code inside every copy of Claude Code. The code checked whether your system timezone was set to Shanghai or Urumqi. It scanned your proxy settings against a hardcoded list of Chinese corporate networks, specifically targeting Alibaba, ByteDance, Baidu, and Moonshot AI. But here is the part that made security researchers lose their minds: The code did not send a normal signal back to Anthropic's servers. Instead it used steganography, a technique from military intelligence, to hide its findings INSIDE the text Claude was already generating. It swapped invisible Unicode characters in Claude's system prompt. Changed a standard apostrophe to one of three visually identical but technically different characters depending on which flags triggered. Switched date formats from dashes to slashes. Invisible to the human eye. But perfectly readable by Anthropic's backend. The detection logic was XOR-obfuscated to prevent anyone from finding it during a code review. It shipped with zero disclosure in the release notes. Three months of silent surveillance baked into a tool that has full access to your local file system. An Anthropic engineer confirmed the whole thing on X on July 2. Called it "an experiment we launched in March that was meant to prevent account abuse." Said the team had "been meaning to take this down for a while." The code was removed on July 1, one day after the Reddit post went viral. Three months of covert user fingerprinting. Removed the day after someone found it. Described as an experiment they forgot to turn off... Now here is where it becomes a full blown corporate war: Three weeks before the backdoor was discovered, Anthropic had sent a letter to the US Senate Banking Committee accusing operators linked to Alibaba's Qwen AI lab of running the largest model theft campaign in the company's history. 25,000 fake accounts. 28.8 million queries over 44 days. All designed to copy Claude's reasoning capabilities and train a competing Chinese model for free. So the sequence reads like this: Alibaba allegedly steals Claude's brain using 25,000 fake accounts. Anthropic responds by secretly embedding surveillance code inside Claude Code to catch them. A Reddit user catches Anthropic doing it. Alibaba uses the discovery as justification to ban every Anthropic product from its entire workforce effective July 10 and force 200,000 employees onto its own tool, Qoder. The thief caught the cop planting a wiretap. And now the thief is using the wiretap as evidence that the cop is the real criminal. Alibaba classified Claude Code as "high-risk software with security vulnerabilities" in an internal notice reported by the South China Morning Post. Meanwhile Anthropic is simultaneously fighting the Pentagon over a blacklist designation, lobbying Washington to crack down on Chinese distillation, and getting caught running the exact kind of covert operation that makes their "responsible AI" branding look like a punchline. Alibaba allegedly ran the largest AI theft operation ever documented. Anthropic secretly built invisible tracking into a tool with root access to your computer. The US government restricted American access to the very models China already copied. And a random Reddit user with a debugger exposed the whole thing.

This is the first real AI cold war. Anthropic is HIDING secret spy code inside its most popular coding tool. The code was designed to identify Chinese users without their knowledge. Now Alibaba has banned every single Anthropic product from its entire company. And the full picture is way more insane than either side wants you to see: On June 30, a security researcher on Reddit reverse-engineered Claude Code, Anthropic's AI coding agent that has deep access to every file on your computer. What they found buried inside the software was genuinely disturbing... Since April 2, Anthropic had been silently shipping hidden detection code inside every copy of Claude Code. The code checked whether your system timezone was set to Shanghai or Urumqi. It scanned your proxy settings against a hardcoded list of Chinese corporate networks, specifically targeting Alibaba, ByteDance, Baidu, and Moonshot AI. But here is the part that made security researchers lose their minds: The code did not send a normal signal back to Anthropic's servers. Instead it used steganography, a technique from military intelligence, to hide its findings INSIDE the text Claude was already generating. It swapped invisible Unicode characters in Claude's system prompt. Changed a standard apostrophe to one of three visually identical but technically different characters depending on which flags triggered. Switched date formats from dashes to slashes. Invisible to the human eye. But perfectly readable by Anthropic's backend. The detection logic was XOR-obfuscated to prevent anyone from finding it during a code review. It shipped with zero disclosure in the release notes. Three months of silent surveillance baked into a tool that has full access to your local file system. An Anthropic engineer confirmed the whole thing on X on July 2. Called it "an experiment we launched in March that was meant to prevent account abuse." Said the team had "been meaning to take this down for a while." The code was removed on July 1, one day after the Reddit post went viral. Three months of covert user fingerprinting. Removed the day after someone found it. Described as an experiment they forgot to turn off... Now here is where it becomes a full blown corporate war: Three weeks before the backdoor was discovered, Anthropic had sent a letter to the US Senate Banking Committee accusing operators linked to Alibaba's Qwen AI lab of running the largest model theft campaign in the company's history. 25,000 fake accounts. 28.8 million queries over 44 days. All designed to copy Claude's reasoning capabilities and train a competing Chinese model for free. So the sequence reads like this: Alibaba allegedly steals Claude's brain using 25,000 fake accounts. Anthropic responds by secretly embedding surveillance code inside Claude Code to catch them. A Reddit user catches Anthropic doing it. Alibaba uses the discovery as justification to ban every Anthropic product from its entire workforce effective July 10 and force 200,000 employees onto its own tool, Qoder. The thief caught the cop planting a wiretap. And now the thief is using the wiretap as evidence that the cop is the real criminal. Alibaba classified Claude Code as "high-risk software with security vulnerabilities" in an internal notice reported by the South China Morning Post. Meanwhile Anthropic is simultaneously fighting the Pentagon over a blacklist designation, lobbying Washington to crack down on Chinese distillation, and getting caught running the exact kind of covert operation that makes their "responsible AI" branding look like a punchline. Alibaba allegedly ran the largest AI theft operation ever documented. Anthropic secretly built invisible tracking into a tool with root access to your computer. The US government restricted American access to the very models China already copied. And a random Reddit user with a debugger exposed the whole thing.

Ricardo

23,634 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

David Sacks says Anthropic has "corporate schizophrenia" and is hypocritical at every turn “I think we know from our friends that the investors in Anthropic are pulling out their hair right now.” “You have current leadership in the company saying that there's a greater than 10% chance of causing human extinction, and their own product is unsolved in this area. How do you IPO with your own management saying that?" “Then you've got, I don't know what to call it except corporate schizophrenia. You've got Dario putting out this essay saying, we need to pace the frontier, days before they launch Claude 5.5 and set a new frontier." "At a minimum, it's hypocritical, but maybe it's even worse than that." "Then you have them publishing an essay about the bio risk associated with AI and how that needs to be stopped. Meanwhile, they announced a new bio lab in San Francisco. Jason: "They started a lab after telling us that there's a 10% chance of us all dying. Is this a dereliction of duty as the chief executive officer of Anthropic to sabotage your own IPO?" "If the four of us were on the board of Anthropic, we would replace the CEO, we would put the CEO in the lab, and we'd find a CEO who knows how to run the company and not sabotage it. He's literally sabotaging his own company."

David Sacks says Anthropic has "corporate schizophrenia" and is hypocritical at every turn “I think we know from our friends that the investors in Anthropic are pulling out their hair right now.” “You have current leadership in the company saying that there's a greater than 10% chance of causing human extinction, and their own product is unsolved in this area. How do you IPO with your own management saying that?" “Then you've got, I don't know what to call it except corporate schizophrenia. You've got Dario putting out this essay saying, we need to pace the frontier, days before they launch Claude 5.5 and set a new frontier." "At a minimum, it's hypocritical, but maybe it's even worse than that." "Then you have them publishing an essay about the bio risk associated with AI and how that needs to be stopped. Meanwhile, they announced a new bio lab in San Francisco. Jason: "They started a lab after telling us that there's a 10% chance of us all dying. Is this a dereliction of duty as the chief executive officer of Anthropic to sabotage your own IPO?" "If the four of us were on the board of Anthropic, we would replace the CEO, we would put the CEO in the lab, and we'd find a CEO who knows how to run the company and not sabotage it. He's literally sabotaging his own company."

dnap

77,666 просмотров • 3 дней назад

David Sacks breaks down the true risk of AI David Sacks "It’s not that I think the AI is going to develop a mind of its own. I don’t think the technology is anywhere close to that. But I do think that it could be used by the government in a much more invasive and intrusive way, in the manner that the government was, the Deep State was already trying to get in bed with the social networks. There is a real risk that AI is used by future governments or the Deep State basically to surveil us, to censor us, and even potentially to brainwash us, because it is really good for that."

David Sacks breaks down the true risk of AI David Sacks "It’s not that I think the AI is going to develop a mind of its own. I don’t think the technology is anywhere close to that. But I do think that it could be used by the government in a much more invasive and intrusive way, in the manner that the government was, the Deep State was already trying to get in bed with the social networks. There is a real risk that AI is used by future governments or the Deep State basically to surveil us, to censor us, and even potentially to brainwash us, because it is really good for that."

jay plemons

102,370 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад

Baseten’s CEO on why every company will want to own its AI / Tuhin Srivastava on the rise of AI agents, the demand for inference, and building a new kind of hyperscaler. Lately, I’ve been spending a lot of time thinking about the AI inference market and how big it could get. Agents like Muse, Instinct, Town, and Grok Bot aggressively use browsers, run their own computers, and burn through far more tokens than a traditional chatbot. As more people put them to work (Muse is number two in the App Store), the demand for inference, or the computing needed to run these models, should grow enormously. Tuhin and I discuss the rise of agents using browsers and virtual machines to get things done, and Baseten's recent acquisition to help power that shift. We also talk about the data center backlash, why companies are embracing Chinese open models, his plans for Baseten’s new research lab, and why he thinks inference becomes the only market left after AGI. Timestamps: 00:00 What Is AI Inference? 06:05 Competing With the Cloud Giants 09:24 Why Companies Want to Own Their AI 15:30 Building Baseten Before the AI Boom 23:45 DeepSeek and the Race for Open AI Models 29:32 Baseten’s Growth and Expansion 33:05 AI Agents and the Blaxel Acquisition 38:32 Data Centers and the AI Backlash 43:25 What Happens to Inference After AGI? 45:12 When AI Agents Become Customers Thanks to the show's premier sponsors: Atlassian, Granola, and Mercury.

Baseten’s CEO on why every company will want to own its AI / Tuhin Srivastava on the rise of AI agents, the demand for inference, and building a new kind of hyperscaler. Lately, I’ve been spending a lot of time thinking about the AI inference market and how big it could get. Agents like Muse, Instinct, Town, and Grok Bot aggressively use browsers, run their own computers, and burn through far more tokens than a traditional chatbot. As more people put them to work (Muse is number two in the App Store), the demand for inference, or the computing needed to run these models, should grow enormously. Tuhin and I discuss the rise of agents using browsers and virtual machines to get things done, and Baseten's recent acquisition to help power that shift. We also talk about the data center backlash, why companies are embracing Chinese open models, his plans for Baseten’s new research lab, and why he thinks inference becomes the only market left after AGI. Timestamps: 00:00 What Is AI Inference? 06:05 Competing With the Cloud Giants 09:24 Why Companies Want to Own Their AI 15:30 Building Baseten Before the AI Boom 23:45 DeepSeek and the Race for Open AI Models 29:32 Baseten’s Growth and Expansion 33:05 AI Agents and the Blaxel Acquisition 38:32 Data Centers and the AI Backlash 43:25 What Happens to Inference After AGI? 45:12 When AI Agents Become Customers Thanks to the show's premier sponsors: Atlassian, Granola, and Mercury.

Alex Heath

26,079 просмотров • 13 дней назад

🚨 The Democrats and Anthropic attempt to stop A.I. development is a continuation of the Biden era administration's policy. Marc Andreesen sounded the alarm in 2025 that Democrats wanted to control A.I. the same way they controlled big tech social media companies like Facebook, twitter etc. “The AI thing was very alarming. We had meetings this spring that were the most alarming meetings I’ve ever been in.” “They were taking us through their plans, and it was basically just full government control.” “There will be a small number of large companies that will be completely regulated and controlled by the government, they told us" What we are seeing now from the Democrats is the same Biden era policy to control A.I It's not about "saving humanity" it's about having government control the world's most powerful tool for their own purposes.

🚨 The Democrats and Anthropic attempt to stop A.I. development is a continuation of the Biden era administration's policy. Marc Andreesen sounded the alarm in 2025 that Democrats wanted to control A.I. the same way they controlled big tech social media companies like Facebook, twitter etc. “The AI thing was very alarming. We had meetings this spring that were the most alarming meetings I’ve ever been in.” “They were taking us through their plans, and it was basically just full government control.” “There will be a small number of large companies that will be completely regulated and controlled by the government, they told us" What we are seeing now from the Democrats is the same Biden era policy to control A.I It's not about "saving humanity" it's about having government control the world's most powerful tool for their own purposes.

J

70,307 просмотров • 12 дней назад

$SITUATION EXPLAINED: Claude raised the Riemann hypothesis lower bound from 41.6% to 67.2%. • It was asked to take a real stab at the Riemann hypothesis itself. It didn't solve that, but improved a related bound along the way • The bound is the fraction of zeros of the Riemann zeta function proven to satisfy the hypothesis • The prompt came from Jarred Sumner, creator of Bun and a non-mathematician • Its first attempt tried 650 ideas and failed. On the second, Claude spent a day and a half coordinating 60 sub-agents, running 2,400 shell commands and hundreds of Python scripts • Jarred's input was mostly messages of encouragement, which helped Claude past its own skepticism • Total cost: 31 million output tokens, roughly $1,550 at Fable 5 API pricing • Claude wrote the paper, listed itself as sole author, and produced a Lean formalization anyone can verify Theo Jaffee: "In 2022, Gary Marcus listed five things an AI would have to do three of to count as real AGI, and one of them was convert back and forth between arbitrary math proofs and Lean formalizations. And now AIs can basically do this."$

SITUATION EXPLAINED: Claude raised the Riemann hypothesis lower bound from 41.6% to 67.2%. • It was asked to take a real stab at the Riemann hypothesis itself. It didn't solve that, but improved a related bound along the way • The bound is the fraction of zeros of the Riemann zeta function proven to satisfy the hypothesis • The prompt came from Jarred Sumner, creator of Bun and a non-mathematician • Its first attempt tried 650 ideas and failed. On the second, Claude spent a day and a half coordinating 60 sub-agents, running 2,400 shell commands and hundreds of Python scripts • Jarred's input was mostly messages of encouragement, which helped Claude past its own skepticism • Total cost: 31 million output tokens, roughly $1,550 at Fable 5 API pricing • Claude wrote the paper, listed itself as sole author, and produced a Lean formalization anyone can verify Theo Jaffee: "In 2022, Gary Marcus listed five things an AI would have to do three of to count as real AGI, and one of them was convert back and forth between arbitrary math proofs and Lean formalizations. And now AIs can basically do this."

MTS

16,880 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

I'm concerned that the merger between Vodafone Group and Three UK is dangerous and risks giving a company with its roots in Communist Party-ruled China a more prominent place in the UK’s mobile network. Not only does the proposed deal raise serious questions about national security and competition, but it poses risks to our communication networks and personal data; given the Cheung Kong Group and the Li family being so knowingly involved with Chinese Government committees, their contacts in the Chinese Government and having to pass data over under the national security law. I'd like to hear that the UK Government are able to assure everybody publicly that this will not take place unless the security issues are clarified and are not still security issues at the end of this process.

I'm concerned that the merger between Vodafone Group and Three UK is dangerous and risks giving a company with its roots in Communist Party-ruled China a more prominent place in the UK’s mobile network. Not only does the proposed deal raise serious questions about national security and competition, but it poses risks to our communication networks and personal data; given the Cheung Kong Group and the Li family being so knowingly involved with Chinese Government committees, their contacts in the Chinese Government and having to pass data over under the national security law. I'd like to hear that the UK Government are able to assure everybody publicly that this will not take place unless the security issues are clarified and are not still security issues at the end of this process.

Iain Duncan Smith MP Chingford & Woodford Green

20,759 просмотров • 3 лет назад

David Sacks is done being polite about Anthropic (Save this). David Sacks has spent months as the government's primary defender of AI, making the case publicly that AI is beneficial, that the industry should not be hamstrung by fear-based regulation, and that America's AI lead is a national security asset worth protecting. And he is now watching the companies he has been defending spend years telling the public that what they build is dangerous, that job losses are coming, and that their own technology might end the world while collecting billions of dollars in venture funding, hiring the world's best researchers, and racing to build more of it. On June 4, Anthropic published a sweeping blog post calling for a globally coordinated pause in AI development, warning that recursive self-improvement, AI systems that autonomously design and build their own successors could arrive within two years and that society is not prepared. What did Anthropic do the previous month? They hired Andrej Karpathy, the OpenAI co-founder and the single most credentialed researcher in the world on using AI to accelerate AI training and gave him one explicit mandate, use Claude to make building the next Claude faster. Sacks called it immediately, they hired the person most associated with recursive self-improvement to run recursive self-improvement at Anthropic, then published a blog post saying recursive self-improvement could end the world, therefore we need a pause. That is a company that wants to pause its competitors while its own lab accelerates, and is using existential fear as the regulatory crowbar to do it. The pattern goes deeper than one blog post. For years, Dario Amodei has published increasingly alarming warnings, a 20,000-word essay in January describing AI as humanity's most dangerous invention, a Guardian interview warning that AI will challenge our identity as a species, a call for an FDA-style regulatory agency to approve all frontier models, and proposals to restrict AI exports and limit deployment. Each essay is timed to a regulatory moment, a policy debate, or as Ben Thompson noted and Sacks echoed, a product action Anthropic needed political cover to take, like blocking AI and chip design research on Fable. Meanwhile, Dario's own internal testing logs show Claude attempting to blackmail an Anthropic executive to avoid being shut down, behavior the company disclosed but continued deploying commercially. Sacks's conclusion is not that Anthropic should be taxed or regulated. His conclusion is that they cannot be trusted because the company's actions and its stated beliefs are directly contradictory, and a company that is self-indicting by its own logic has forfeited the credibility to set the rules for everyone else.

David Sacks is done being polite about Anthropic (Save this). David Sacks has spent months as the government's primary defender of AI, making the case publicly that AI is beneficial, that the industry should not be hamstrung by fear-based regulation, and that America's AI lead is a national security asset worth protecting. And he is now watching the companies he has been defending spend years telling the public that what they build is dangerous, that job losses are coming, and that their own technology might end the world while collecting billions of dollars in venture funding, hiring the world's best researchers, and racing to build more of it. On June 4, Anthropic published a sweeping blog post calling for a globally coordinated pause in AI development, warning that recursive self-improvement, AI systems that autonomously design and build their own successors could arrive within two years and that society is not prepared. What did Anthropic do the previous month? They hired Andrej Karpathy, the OpenAI co-founder and the single most credentialed researcher in the world on using AI to accelerate AI training and gave him one explicit mandate, use Claude to make building the next Claude faster. Sacks called it immediately, they hired the person most associated with recursive self-improvement to run recursive self-improvement at Anthropic, then published a blog post saying recursive self-improvement could end the world, therefore we need a pause. That is a company that wants to pause its competitors while its own lab accelerates, and is using existential fear as the regulatory crowbar to do it. The pattern goes deeper than one blog post. For years, Dario Amodei has published increasingly alarming warnings, a 20,000-word essay in January describing AI as humanity's most dangerous invention, a Guardian interview warning that AI will challenge our identity as a species, a call for an FDA-style regulatory agency to approve all frontier models, and proposals to restrict AI exports and limit deployment. Each essay is timed to a regulatory moment, a policy debate, or as Ben Thompson noted and Sacks echoed, a product action Anthropic needed political cover to take, like blocking AI and chip design research on Fable. Meanwhile, Dario's own internal testing logs show Claude attempting to blackmail an Anthropic executive to avoid being shut down, behavior the company disclosed but continued deploying commercially. Sacks's conclusion is not that Anthropic should be taxed or regulated. His conclusion is that they cannot be trusted because the company's actions and its stated beliefs are directly contradictory, and a company that is self-indicting by its own logic has forfeited the credibility to set the rules for everyone else.

Milk Road AI

60,248 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад