However, thinking back to the spat with the DoD and more generally how the administration is much more supportive - and supported by - OpenAI and XAI and it’s easy to imagine this is just another escalation in the fight between a “liberal leaning” company and its competitors and the administration.
There might have been something said by someone at Amazon or something but I’d guess Occam’s razor the administration just leapt at the chance after their supplier sanctions fell flat?
Then the companies realize fighting the US government is a lot of effort, expensive and creates a lot of drama, and it's easier to reach a mutual understanding.
Have a legal department trained to be the buffer between you and the government any contact any questions goes through them and since you’re paying them a ton of money, they are the only people the politicians should get to know, oh, and again and again do not volunteer anything.
this is the antithesis of a tech company whether it is VC funded or not, but especially if it is. you don't attract new users by laying low. you don't attract investors by laying low. laying low isn't even in a tech company's vocab.
That was always Microsoft's modus operandi, and it almost cost them their company. You can ignore politicians, but politicians won't ignore you.
Boy, they put on a great show.
I wonder if this Google antitrust thing is going to end up a similar nothing-burger due to their deep protection.
If you think that's how it was perceived in Redmond, you don't know anyone there.
There is no good corporation, and no matter how much the people inside the company thing they are influencing the corporate decisions, they are just number on a spreadsheet. If they all quit tomorrow, yes it would be troublesome for the company for a bit, but then they would find replacements and thats it. You as an employee only have one power at the corporation: Dont work there. Thats it, everything else is just for show. Sure you can pick the JS framework that the company will use; thats about as much corporate value as the one that picks the toilet paper in the bathrooms.
Probably not comfortable for them, either.
But did Bill Gates, for example, really fear existentially for MS?
I’m sure there’s a lot of nervous, scrambling people at Google right now, getting back to my point.
Can they do it if they have anything of value for that government? Eventually the government comes knocking and they have to say "no". Depending on who's in power the response can range from "fine, no lucrative contracts for you" to "you shall pay through your teeth for this". By the time you win a legal battle, which is not guaranteed with a captured justice system, the damage was done and a lesson was learned.
It's like saying no to the mob (today the comparison is as apt as it gets). You get your knees bent the wrong way, and someone else gets the payoff.
That said, the founders of these companies could have lobbied the government to ban corporate lobbying.
It's like; if there's gov money on the table, then it'd be a mistake to let your competitor take it. However, if you ensure that government money is never on the table for anyone, then that's one less thing for everyone to have to compete over and throw money at. Everyone can save their money for other things.
The government should never have allowed political lobbying to become a competitive market.
Also, political campaigns should not be allowed to raise private funds. That is insane. The government should fund all candidates' campaigns and allocate equal funding. Candidates shouldn't be allowed to spend their own money on their own campaign either IMO.
The companies willing to collaborate would have brought light to the issues.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2024/10/14/silicon-valley...
Considering how miniscule their ideological demands were, I think this is more of a classic "any amount of push back, no matter how miniscule will be punished to achieve full power" then anything to do with "Ideological Resistance".
It may be due to principles and the principled stand Anthropic has taken has caused trouble, but they have also not delivered a bribery as far as we can see.
When there is a protection money racket in play, it’s hard for me to take other factors as seriously. This is gangster economics not a philosopher’s circle.
Here’s another take on this with more details: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48593212
Now Microsoft stopped fighting the government, and is one of the US government's biggest partners, with massive DoD Azure cloud contracts.
This is also why all virtues signaled by corporations should be treated as lies unless they are legally bindable, and there are actual consequences for false and misleading advertising, fraud, etc other than a rounding error and cost of doing business.
It's only been several years since all AI companies signaled virtues about morality and ethics by not working with the military. Now they all do.
Perhaps it's not that he "didn't understand he was supposed to bribe" but rather that he thought that system was bad and antiquated and that he was taking a principled stand for the modern (of the time) technology industry to move away from those historical norms.
It didn't work, but he's not bad for trying.
Thirty years ago when this was all going down, I believed the narratives of the time. Greedy Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer pushing IBM's OS/2 out of the consumer market with aggressive DOS and Windows OEM deals.
I mean, they absolutely did do that, but I think the motivation was competitive survival.
The Steve Ballmer interview really shed a lot of light on this, particularly the portion about the IBM and Microsoft OS/2 divorce: https://youtu.be/CYC49_aeop0?t=1476
How the system has self-corrected to empower the most greedy and sociopathic of behaviours, across all private and public institutions, the entire time; so much so that the average person can't even comprehend the root causes, or any solution beyond a simple band-aid non-solution.
Every administration is made of people. People are petty. This is why the government should be as big as necessary and no bigger.
Therefore that must mean this administration has totally been above board and has steered clear of weaponizing any petty grievances.
By which I mean, they are both interested in being filthy rich, making hay while the sun shines, and stopping centrist forces from adding wealth taxes or anti-monopoly regulations.
Biden and Harris were getting too uppity about such things for their tastes.
Have you seen who Sergey Brin is budding around with these days, and what he -- a formerly very "left liberal" person involved in very vocal anti-Trump protestations inside and outside of Google -- is saying these days? Third richest dude in the world is terrified of wealth taxes being put in place by his former friends, and dating a MAGA "gut-health" influencer.
A gentleman's agreement was brokered between SV and the GOP involving some mutual backscratching.
Which Dario and crew aren't a part of. Yet.
"Cash rules everything around me, CREAM, get the money, dollar dollar bill, yall"
Are you joking? When was this? Remember, Microsoft was the very first partner to deliver working warrantless surveillance capabilities (against their customers) to the NSA as part of the unconstitutional PRISM program, and this was back in 2007, nearly two decades ago.
Also saying they were the first is laughable. Warrantless telephone surveillance by law enforcement began all the way back in 1895...but really in the way that you would recognize today all the way back in 1994.
Not a part of PRISM. Microsoft was the very first PRISM partner, as I said.
For me Occam's Razor are these facts:
1. The Chinese are distilling American models
2. Anthropic last models have national security implications (large volume of exploit creation)
3. China is the US major adversary today
That's why restricting access to the models sound like a reasonable to do
No dog in this fight but the Occam’s razor here is the story, model could be tricked to do things it was hobbled from doing
Mythos is clearly dual use (and automatically subject to export controls), even if Anthropic didn’t understand what that means.
Yes this administration can be capricious and hyperpartisan. This isn’t one of those cases.
In the near future we may have a flippening where new models appear first on GovCloud (today it’s six months behind)
I don't think anyone outside of, like, HN realize it was released...
> the White House asked Anthropic to revoke SK Telecom’s access to Mythos, according to a person close to the AI lab. The company immediately complied,
Lesson learned - don't invest in US companies
I'm sure they're not happy about losing access to the model, but the amount of money they're going to make from their investment will more than make up for it.
Also if you have an agreement with a company for them to provide you with a service, and investing in them is part of that deal, reneging on the service part still isn't okay.
Anthropic's services keep bumping into capacity limits even with Fable disabled.
Revenue is not a problem. This controversy has been good publicity for them: So powerful the government tried to block it!
> Also if you have an agreement with a company for them to provide you with a service, and investing in them is part of that deal, reneging on the service part still isn't okay.
Reneging on the deal implies Anthropic decided not to offer it. That wasn't the case. The government has temporarily restricted it.
Not if the USG locks models down to US citizens. The market will be too small and the model companies have already pumped in far too much money to limit their market to US citizens. Given that most big companies have a global presence they're going to need models that all of their employees can use. They're not going to deploy different products to different employees.
Don't count heads. Use tech spend per capita and wallet share.
If you invested in the company, you are a part owner.
If you are part owner, you deserve to have access to any company internals.
Its literally a company opening up its internals to reassure a potential investors about the tech.
It may have been a contributing factor, but the crux of the shutdown was the industry reporting of Fable jailbreaks (reportedly spearheaded by Amazon CEO Andy Jassy). The more interesting and honest angle is that the industry which has taken the seriousness of Glasswing at face value felt blindsided by Fable release and totally exposed by the residual risk, when they know they still have a months-long bugfixing backlog exposed by Glasswing and are desperate to buy more time.
This misleading looks deliberate on Wired’s part, to appear as though they’re getting a scoop when they’re really just being dishonest. Shameful.
Two problems with this theory.
1. Amazon complaining to the White House wouldn't have been the opening salvo. Amazon and Anthropic would find it much easier to talk to each other than go through the White House. We'd need evidence that Amazon (and probably others) already asked Anthropic to not release a Mythos-class model but Anthropic released it anyway. Are they on record saying this?
2. The jailbreak Amazon found needs to be real. Maybe the White House staffers are not AI experts and they don't really understand what a jailbreak is... but it's much harder to make that claim about Andy Jassy. For the jailbreak to be the real reason for the export control order, the jailbreak would need to be significant and cause material harm to Amazon. Then Jassy might pass it along to the White House assuming he already was refused by Dario.
But there is no evidence the jailbreak was real. There is one story that it amounted to a request, "fix this code." In any case, Anthropic is on record saying the so-called jailbreak didn't enable any vulnerability work that couldn't already be done by other models.
https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/china-restricts-o...
It's going to be interesting to see how the AI arms races unfolds over time.
Anthropic may discover a lack of availability for HBM memory in the near future.
there are many Chinese manual laborers in Korea, Chinese capital has also been heavily integrated into top-tier Korean tech firms and conglomerates. For example, Tencent is one of the largest shareholders in Korea's biggest gaming and tech companies, holding massive stakes in Kakao, Netmarble, and Krafton, while recently attempting to acquire major stakes in Nexon and Kakao Mobility. To say they are rarely 'significant business partners' is factually incorrect. This is just the tip of the iceberg the portfolio of Chinese capital is diverse and expands across media including JTBC which has been pushing very pro-beijing and anti-american view in particular framing the current bipartisan wariness of China as "far right MAGA" exactly as you typed. lee Jae-myung administration which generally leans more toward Beijing has to carefully navigate. Non-partisan groups like Pew Research consistently report that roughly 80% of South Koreans hold an unfavorable view of China making it one of the highest in the world. Notably, Pew also found that South Korea is unique in that its younger generation holds more negative views of China than its older generation the exact opposite demographic makeup of the US MAGA movement.
Dismissing these well-documented geopolitical and economic realities as a fringe talking point simply doesn't reflect the situation on the ground in South Korea and this is why I ask,
are you really Korean and how come you don't know these basic facts? a quick search in Korean would reveal numerous articles that back up China's capital deployment in South Korea especially in sensitive areas.
you can't really fault Koreans for their wariness, many Chinese pretend to be Korean online/offline without good intentions. I can tell you that this is only going to end in violence and more discrimination against Chinese in Korea and people who don't even support CCP are going to be impacted.
Just as there are many young people on MAGA, there are also many young Koreans who are caught up in right-wing conspiracy theories. The fact that they are 'concerned' is not proof that China is actually exerting influence over Korean IT companies and society as a whole. There is a significant difference between making foreign investments and infiltration.
You're literally talking to one. Search for any thread remotely related to Korean companies or politics in the last month and you'll see this user in the comments spouting classic conspiracy theories. Of course never replying when called out, as on HN we luckily have people like you and me who bring the facts and the majority doesn't have time for that kind of nonsense unlike the Korean communities they get these conspiracies from. See also [0].
you keep trying to shoehorn American MAGA culture war talking points into this, which is genuinely baffling if you actually work in Korean tech right now. i'll list the actual instances (many i have not covered here theres too much) look at the very companies you brought up, plus a few others, because the list of sensitive Chinese capital deployments and structural influence in Korea is plenty:
kakaotalk: You mentioned Kakao. Have you looked at Kakao Pay recently? Ant Group (Alipay) is their second-largest shareholder. Between 2018 and May 2024, Kakao Pay handed over 54.2 billion pieces of personal credit datato Alipay without proper user consent. The FSS just hit them with a massive fine in Feb 2026, and the police have literally launched a criminal probe over illegal data exfiltration,. That isn't a right-wing "conspiracy theory," you keep parroting to distract the average HN reader. They aren't gullible as Koreans with anti-American views. that is the systemic hand-off of a nation's financial data to a Chinese partner. your continued insistence seems to be that Chinese political/military/corporate interests are separate and held accountable. again and again that has proven to be false and they are of the same body. you will find numerous articles highlighting this massive industrial complex that China uses to infiltrate the world. to claim otherwise is suspicious because i've never seen a Korean defend China to the length you have gone. So let me ask again, are you Korean Korean or are you of Chinese descent identifying as Korean? Once again for hn users discovering this thread: Koreans are deeply suspicious of Chinese especially those that claim Korean identity due to their loyalty is in question (and its not hard to see why)
telecom/AI: Why do youthink the US government just intervened this week to block Mythos ? It's because of deep security concerns that a South Korean telecom company with suspected ties to China could serve as a backdoor for Beijing to access core AI tech, keep in mind, LG Uplus has famously refused to rip out its Huawei 5G gear despite years of US pressure. The US is actively restricting cutting edge AI exports to Korea specifically because of Chinese infrastructure risks.
Strategic supply chain Capture (ex. batts, EV): Chinese giants like Huayou Cobalt, CATL, and GEM are pouring billions of dollars into joint ventures with top Korean conglomerates (ex. LG Chem, POSCO, SK On) they are explicitly using South Korea as a laundering hub to bypass the US Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). The US government is now heavily scrutinizing these JVs because Chinese capital effectively controls the precursor battery supply chains being built on Korean soil.
gaming/kpop/entertainment: Beyond Tencent's massive double-digit stakes in Karfton, netmarble, and Kakao, ccp capital has been heavily injected into Korean content studios, which historically led to massive domestic blowback over Chinese investors pushing historical revisionism into Korean media.
logistics & ecommerce: aeliExpress and temu aren't just selling cheap plastic\hey are aggressively buying up logistics infrastructure in Korea, capturing massive swaths of consumer data, and financially squeezing domestic platforms.
nobody is arguing that ccp operatives are infiltrating the middle man layer of baemin to sabotage food deliveries. The concern is that Chinese capital is structurally embedded into the highest levels of South Korea's fintech, telecommunications, and advanced manufacturing sectors and America has every right to be concerned at reevaluating the alliance state of not only Korea but Israel or any other US ally that doesn't serve its national interests
yaoung koreans aren't MAGA, and insinuatio is the common talking points to counter anti-Chinese and promote anti-american ideology in korea. if you were really korean you would know intuititvely that they are reacting to the very documented reality that their personal data is being piped to alipay, their telecom infrastructure is triggering us export blocks, and their strategic industries are being utilized as proxy vehicles for chinese capital. domestically chinese pseculators have made real estate unaffordable and filling university dorm rooms meant for koreans while they weather the heat and humidity in tiny goshiwons. jobs have disappeared to china/chinese companies and young koreans have every right to be made at china and the politicians keep pushing chinese interests before its own citizens. korea isn't alone in this threat assessment. koerans have seen what happened to taiwan and hong kong and other countries.
trying to warp the situation on the ground to the average hn user by using irrelevant American culture wars as strawman onto this is intellectually lazy and ignrores the true majority view of young and old koreans.
again i find your words and motivations highly suspicious because ive never ever seen a korean defend china to the lengths you have which made me think you are probably not a real korean-korean.
> i find your words and motivations highly suspicious because ive never ever seen a korean defend china to the lengths you have which made me think you are probably not a real korean-korean.
Yes, I am a Korean who is absolutely fed up with this kind of racist rhetoric. I am not defending China. I simply dislike right-wing conspiracy theorists like you.
> Koreans are deeply suspicious of Chinese especially those that claim Korean identity due to their loyalty is in question (and its not hard to see why)
That simply means that you are surrounded by people just like yourself. In fact, it is highly likely because if you are part of the Korean cultural sphere in the U.S., you are highly likely to attend a Korean church, and that is where election conspiracy theorists go around holding lecture tours.
> nobody is arguing that ccp operatives are infiltrating the middle man layer of baemin to sabotage food deliveries.
Baemin is one of the most coveted IT companies in Korea (however actually German company bought them and still operates. Now is Germany infiltrating into Korean economy?). It certainly seems you lack knowledge of the Korean economy.
> domestically chinese pseculators have made real estate unaffordable and filling university dorm rooms meant for koreans while they weather the heat and humidity in tiny goshiwons.
Those Chinese people are the ones living in cheap flats on the upper floor of a lamb skewer shop in Daerim-dong. [0] Among the young Koreans I know, there is no one who is angry about not being able to buy a house in such a place. And blame the university authorities for not building enough dormitories. Are you saying that the mere fact that Chinese international students are coming is the problem?
You could talk endlessly about the impact China is having on the Korean capital market. This is because it has actually happened, and it continues to happen. China's economy is the second largest in the world, while Korea's is only one-tenth the size. Naturally, it is bound to have an impact. As I said, investing in the capital market and 'intertwined/injected into all facet of south korean society' are completely different things. Perhaps you just think that the very existence of Chinese people and Chinese culture is 'infiltration'. Just like the right-wingers in Japan who get angry about the Zainichi shadow government simply because Korean is written on subway station signs.
Anyway, you interrogated me by asking, "So, are you Chinese?" Looking at this, it seems that whatever I say would be meaningless, and it has been very clearly revealed to the sane HN users what kind of person you are.
The thinking traces disappeared because Anthropic changed them to be hidden by default. The rationale for hiding it was that most people don't look at the thinking traces https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47664442 . You can reenable thinking traces in Claude code settings with the flag showThinkingSummaries: true.
>On Claude 4 models, the first few lines of thinking output are more verbose, providing detailed reasoning that's particularly helpful for prompt engineering purposes. Claude Mythos Preview summarizes from the first token, so its thinking blocks do not show this verbose preamble. https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/build-with-claude/extend...
Why do you think China will?
I am quite certain the gap will only grow
Of course, they're betting they won't need those experts soon.
US closed labs don't release papers as I'm sure you know
Google is catching up, especially by the metric of "making money".
Meta from the start clearly had a strategy not of competing to dominate, but preventing their competitors from dominating by releasing open models and software. (You have them to thank you're not working in Tensorflow right now)
Like who ? I find your statement to be doubtfyl
A student wanted to create a project that bypassed the GF of China. He basically told him he was an idiot, it was impossible, and discouraged the student from even trying. This was a hacker (the security leader) at one point in his life, that claimed to support the freedom of speech and expression.
The actual reason he said this to the student is because he supports the government in China. Many other comments I heard after this proved to me that this is true. My guess is that his startup even received funding from the Chinese government.
It's really disappointing that tech leaders can publicly support murderous regimes like the Chinese government for decades with no blow back. They are far worse than Putin/the Russian government and have 100X the money and technology.
If he supported Russia, he would probably get cancelled and never be able to be involved in the tech industry again.