Updated
Updated
AIAnthropic is releasing a proposal on how governments can address risks posed by frontier AI, alongside a policy framework for job displacement. The company says it intends to provide substantial financial backing for the job displacement framework.
AIAnthropic, which has long advocated transparency requirements for frontier AI, says that approach is no longer enough. The post suggests risks are now clearer, so transparency alone does not meet the need.
AIDario Amodei, Anthropic's CEO, now believes frontier models should undergo mandatory third-party testing for cyber, bio, and autonomy risks. He argues that these testers should have the power to block or revoke deployment of models posing catastrophic risk.
AIAnthropic CEO Dario Amodei has published a new essay, "Policy on the AI Exponential," arguing that AI is advancing much faster than policymaking processes were designed to handle. The essay describes where he believes the technology currently stands and outlines the actions needed to close that gap.
AIThe Foundation for American Innovation launched a Physical Intelligence team to address regulatory and legal barriers to deploying autonomous robotics and other physical-world AI in the United States. The team plans to focus on regulatory climate, technical trajectory, industrial strategy, and liability and cybersecurity frameworks. The article argues that physical AI will matter most where human on-site labor drives costs, such as construction.
AIThe Trump administration announced that most green-card applicants will need to leave the U.S. and apply for permanent residency at an American consulate abroad, instead of filing from within the country. Yann LeCun's main post offers only the one-word reaction "Why?" with no further explanation.
AIChris Olah, speaking for Anthropic, argues that the questions posed by AI extend far beyond the AI community and urges religions, civil society, academics, and governments to participate in shaping a positive outcome. He says he is glad the Catholic Church is engaging and is honored to speak at the presentation of Pope Leo XIV's first encyclical, Magnifica humanitas, scheduled for May 25.
AIYann LeCun points to Project Tapestry, hosted by thealliance.ai, as the answer to fears that no credible Western open frontier model will emerge. The post is a short pointer to the project, with no details on models, benchmarks, or availability.
AIWriter Dean Ball says he opposes nearly all proposed AI regulation, including algorithmic discrimination rules and pauses on development, while backing state management of catastrophic misuse risks. He frames the position as a tension between classical liberal and conservative instincts toward institutions and change.
AIDean W. Ball argues that Anthropic's Mythos, which finds software vulnerabilities by chaining bugs into exploits, shifts the cost of vulnerability discovery and should not prompt an overreaction. He contends governments hold a uniquely mixed incentive over vulnerabilities, so heavy state control risks making software less secure. He proposes a narrow, testable government role focused on cyber-discovery risk thresholds, with private verification bodies supporting it.
AISoumith Chintala says Jensen Huang understood AI ecosystems, trade, and policy far better than host Dwarkesh Patel in their podcast. He argues that no single model such as Mythos marks a critical phase change, since a state-of-the-art Chinese open-source model with three orders of magnitude more test-time compute and unpublished post-training advances would be a more realistic baseline. He also says American policy should use measured, continuous levers across a Western-controlled ecosystem rather than abrupt interventions.
AIAndrej Karpathy argues that AI can reverse the historical flow of legibility, letting citizens process dense government data that was once accessible only to specialists. He cites examples such as omnibus bills, budgets, lobbying disclosures, and local council decisions, while acknowledging the same tools could be misused.
AI@CharlieBul58993 @JTillipman @bridgewriter (former NSC counsel) -
AIChris Olah, whose account is owned by Anthropic, replied to Charlie Bullock, referencing GW Law professor Jessica Tillipman's view that AI companies can restrict government use of their technology. Tillipman says whether and how such restrictions apply depends on the acquisition pathway, contract type, and terms, and she has published an explainer on AI company rights in government contracts.
AIThe author shares a quoted legal analysis arguing that OpenAI's published Pentagon contract excerpt essentially only permits all lawful use. The analyst notes the excerpt is short, that DoD Directive 3000.09 and other DoD directives referenced in it can be changed by the Department at any time, and that the contract may not guarantee what OpenAI's FAQ implies.
AIChris Olah, identified as an Anthropic account, shared a post pointing to coverage by Kevin Frazier, a national security law professor, with Alan Rozenshtein. The post itself gives no details about the topic or findings covered.
AIGeorgetown law professor Mark Zhia predicts a court would likely find the government's treatment of Anthropic arbitrary and capricious under the APA. He argues OpenAI and Anthropic pose similar security risks, yet the government immediately contracted with OpenAI while treating Anthropic worse than Chinese AI firms.
AIChris Olah, who is listed as an Anthropic account owner, thanked national security law experts for giving independent legal commentary over the weekend. He noted several such experts he had seen, while acknowledging he was likely missing many.
AIChris Olah highlights that national security law professor Alan Rozenshtein (@ARozenshtein) has been very active over the past week, posting on X and publishing extremely thoughtful articles on recent events.
AIAnthropic's Chris Olah posted "Standing by our values," linking to the company's statement on comments from Secretary of War Pete Hegseth. The post itself gives no further details about the comments or the company's position.
AIMckay Wrigley reposted a statement from @SecWar accusing Anthropic of refusing the Department of War unrestricted access to its models for lawful purposes. The quoted statement directs the Department of War to designate Anthropic a Supply-Chain Risk to National Security, bars contractors from commercial activity with Anthropic, and allows Anthropic services for no more than six months. The author's own added text says only that he finds the situation horrifying and supports Anthropic.
Why it matters: The quoted statement is a direct government action against a named AI lab, giving readers a primary-source view of a dispute over military access to AI models.
AIIlya Sutskever says it is extremely good that Anthropic has not backed down and significant that OpenAI has taken a similar stance. He argues that future situations of this nature will be more challenging, and that relevant leaders and fierce competitors must put their differences aside to rise to the occasion.
AIMckay Wrigley posted a patriotic message calling Anthropic "the life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness company." He argued AI lets people raise their ambitions while the country should never lower its standards as the technology advances.
AIAnthropic-affiliated researcher Chris Olah posted a brief "Here I stand, I can do no other" message, quoting a company statement from CEO Dario Amodei on discussions with the Department of War. The post links to Anthropic's statement on the matter, but the post itself gives no further details of the discussions.
AIMckay Wrigley publicly expressed support for Dario Amodei, praising his willingness to defend the civil liberties of American citizens. The post is a short personal statement and gives no details on the specific issue or action involved.
AIAnthropic CEO Dario Amodei says he has been working on an essay mainly about AI and the future. He adds that its emphasis on preserving democratic values and rights at home is especially relevant given recent events in Minnesota.
AIAnthropic CEO Dario Amodei published an essay titled The Adolescence of Technology on the risks powerful AI poses to national security, economies, and democracy. The essay also describes how these risks can be defended against. The post itself contains only the title and a link to the full essay.
AIGeoffrey Hinton recommends that every politician watch a conversation about the future of AI before arguing that regulation will hinder innovation. He links to a YouTube video but does not name the participants or the specific points discussed.
AIARC Prize Foundation announced ARC Prize Verified, a program that certifies frontier model scores on the ARC-AGI benchmark using hidden test sets and adds a third-party academic panel to audit and open-source its testing process. Five AI labs, including Google and xAI, are sponsoring ARC-AGI-3 development, and the foundation says donations do not influence verification scoring. Models that pass verification will appear on the official leaderboard with a verification badge.