Cal Newport

The first explanation is corruption.

The Trump administration has multiple ties to Anthropic's main competitor, OpenAI.

They've also already been in a bit of a feud with Anthropic dating back to March and the issues they had with the Department of War where they placed it as a supply chain risk.

So this would be very Trumpian.

You are my enemies.

Here's a way to like squash or screw with you.

I'm just going to do it.

The second explanation given for what happened, the government is legitimately worried about Fable 5.

And the idea of China using a jailbroken Fable 5 to find security vulnerabilities and key software that's a part of our infrastructure and economy really scared them.

And they said, we don't want this to happen on our watch.

Reason number three, explanation number three, is that they're calling Anthropix bluff.

Anthropix spent six weeks trying to convince people that they had essentially summoned a demon.

with mythos and that it was a grave powerful source they almost regretted having brought into this world and that they and that they were just trying their best to steward this inevitable darkness and keep us safe and then six weeks later like yeah never mind here you go it's uh it's going to be 75 cents token so another way of thinking about this is the government said no you don't get to talk about your product

as the worst thing since nuclear weapons, and then just go and sell it without restriction when you want to.

We have some evidence for this bluff calling rationale if we go back to David Sachs, who said the following, "'Keep in mind that Anthropic itself widely promoted the idea that mythos was a cyber weapon and needed to be regulated as such.

They asked for government regulation of mythos and championed the guardrails unfabled.

If there's a vulnerability, big or small, it is Anthropic's responsibility to patch.'"

All right, so let's go through these three possible rationales for what the government just did and said, are any of these justified?

Could we imagine any of these being the foundation for an actual sustainable approach to AI from a regulatory framework?

Well, the first explanation was corruption.