Who decides when AI is too dangerous?

Summary

Decoder Podcast Summary

Episode Theme:
Who decides when AI is too dangerous?
Date: June 18, 2026
Host: Nilay Patel, Editor-in-chief, The Verge
Guest: Hayden Field, Senior AI Reporter, The Verge

---

Episode Overview

This episode dives into a chaotic weekend in the world of AI regulation. Anthropic’s latest AI model, Claude Fable 5, was abruptly taken offline, not by a technical flaw, but due to sudden, sweeping government export controls imposed by the Trump administration. Nilay Patel and Hayden Field unpack how events spiraled, why Anthropic was targeted, what it means for AI governance in the US, and whether the broader regulatory approach is sustainable.

---

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. The Timeline and Technical Controversy

• Anthropic’s Model Launch:

  • Anthropic launched Mythos 5 (internal, powerful model) and Fable 5 (its public-facing, heavily safeguarded version), skipping prior Fable versions for naming reasons (05:39).
  • Fable 5 generated some memes for its strict “guardrails,” with security researchers unable to properly test its limits (07:45), yet red teamers found it surprisingly robust.

• Amazon’s Role and the 90-Minute Ultimatum:

  • Amazon researchers discovered a potential “jailbreak” vulnerability and discussed it with Anthropic.
  • Amazon CEO Andy Jassy relayed worries to the Trump administration, specifically to Scott Besant, leading to a 90-minute ultimatum for Anthropic to restrict access (08:05).
  • Anthropic—unable to comply instantly, especially regarding foreign nationals—took both Fable and Mythos offline universally (11:21).
  • “[The Trump administration] said, look, you need to shut this down in 90 minutes... any foreign national... can’t use it.”—Hayden Field (09:48).

2. The Regulatory Confusion and Political Dynamics

• Chaotic, Unpredictable Governance:

  • The decision-makers (Jassy, Besant, Trump officials) aren’t AI experts. The process was abrupt, with little technical nuance or clear communication (16:12).
  • The administration's history: previously pro-AI, anti-regulation, and focused on beating China, yet suddenly acting to “kneecap” a leading US company (18:26).
  • “It seems really disorganized... a scramble with all these CEOs trying to race to kowtow to the Trump administration without really being grounded in science or evidence…”—Hayden Field (18:47).

• Personalities Over Process:

  • Anthropic’s notably tense relationship with the Trump administration, colored by prior disputes over supply chain risk and red lines regarding military use (20:43).
  • The fate of models and regulatory enforcement may hinge on whether a CEO personally engages with administration officials (26:11).
  • “In a presidency that seems to be pretty relationship-based, a lot of the time it’s just a handful of guys and how they feel and that seems to be our regulatory apparatus.”—Nilay Patel (27:32).

3. The International and Industry Fallout

• Impact on AI Ecosystem:

  • Competitors like OpenAI, Microsoft, Google could face similar controls, but Anthropic bore the brunt, possibly due to poor relationships and communication (22:41).
  • Companies are already making contingency plans—deploying models offshore and accounting for US political risk for the first time (23:07).
  • “...Companies everywhere are saying, oh, wow, we got to make political risk part of our business plan now.” —Hayden Field (23:07).

• Conflicting Justifications & Old Rumors:

  • Administration rationale for the ban shifted: first concerns about China, then about executive order compliance, though the relevant order hadn’t even taken effect yet (24:44).

4. Regulatory Futures and Public Sentiment

• Biden vs. Trump Approaches:

  • Biden’s rules were technocratic, focusing on transparency and gradual regulation, now mostly rolled back under Trump (31:43).
  • Industry may need to push for more “considered” regulation instead of chaotic, case-by-case panic (33:11).

• Public Disquiet and AI Populism:

  • Mounting protests, job losses blamed on AI, and attacks on AI companies’ leaders are shaping the political debate (34:06).
  • “There’s a rise in AI populism and the fact that people are upset... Even in extreme cases, [they are] attacking AI CEOs' homes.”—Hayden Field (34:09).

5. The Irony: Regulation Backfires on the “AI Doomers”

• Anthropic’s Own Rhetoric:

  • Anthropic is a vocal proponent of aggressive AI regulation and warnings about risks, but their “doomer” language may have spooked regulators further (36:20).
  • “It's partly their hype coming back to haunt them... If you say something’s that dangerous and then a researcher unearths something, yeah, people are gonna freak out.”—Hayden Field (36:20).

• The “Military Tech” Model:

  • Nilay speculates whether AI will become treated like classified military tech, with public getting only “watered down” versions (38:17).
  • “There’s a version where the public gets the Ford Raptor, not the F22, right?”—Nilay Patel (38:17).
  • The race among companies also involves painting each other as “dangerous,” playing into government fears.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the Irony of Anthropic’s Advocacy:

  • “Anthropic has spent years arguing that AI might soon be powerful enough to be dangerous and that the government needed to get serious about regulating AI sooner rather than later. Well, now we’re here, and Anthropic doesn’t love the way it’s playing out.” —Nilay Patel (03:22)

• On the Government’s Rush to Action:

  • “Okay, 90 minute ultimatum... We need to figure out how to fix this jailbreak that’s come to light.” —Hayden Field (09:48)

• On Chaos vs. Expertise:

  • “It’s the worst security breach in history, or this is just a bunch of guys who want to feel important. And I can’t quite figure out which one it is.” —Nilay Patel (16:12)

• On Far-Reaching Consequences:

  • “The whole industry is aghast at this.” —Hayden Field (42:41)

• On AI’s Existential Rhetoric:

  • “By all accounts, Mythos is the most powerful model that exists today. Anthropic is way on the front line of saying, oh, we might kill everyone. Boy, we should stop this.” —Nilay Patel (35:37)

• Literary References:

  • “Every sci-fi or fantasy movie, the ‘for the greater good’ thing is typically used by the villain in the story.” —Hayden Field (39:57)
  • “I think this is the first episode of Decoder where Dario Amade was directly compared to Thanos.” —Nilay Patel (40:31)
  • “To be fair, I was thinking about the guy in Harry Potter when I said that. Grindelwald.”—Hayden Field (40:35)

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

• AI Model Explanation: Mythos & Fable – 05:39
• Amazon’s Jailbreak Discovery and Government Escalation – 08:05
• 90-Minute Ultimatum, Export Controls Imposed – 09:48
• Industry and International Fallout – 22:41
• Personality-driven Regulation – 26:11
• Reflection on Biden vs. Trump Frameworks – 31:43
• Public Backlash and AI Populism – 34:06
• Anthropic’s Regulatory Irony – 36:20
• Military Tech Analogy – 38:17
• Final Thoughts: The Aftermath and Next Steps – 41:08

---

Takeaways

• US AI regulation currently appears haphazard, personality-driven, and reactive, amplifying risk and chaos for innovators and researchers alike.
• Anthropic, despite warning for years about the dangers of unchecked AI, found itself stymied by the very types of abrupt regulatory controls it advocated for—driven less by rational process and more by executive panic and political grudges.
• The incident has global implications: competitors, policymakers, and rival nations are watching to see whether the US can construct a serious tech safety framework or will just continue to “shoot from the hip.”
• The only consensus: the current approach is unsustainable, and building a more rigorous, transparent, and predictable regulatory process is urgently needed.

---

End of Summary

Transcript

[Sponsor Announcer]

Support for the show comes from ServiceNow. AI is moving fast across the enterprise, but without visibility, it's just chaos. Different tools, different models, different teams using AI in completely different ways. ServiceNow turns that chaos into control. With the AI control tower, you see all your AI across the business in one place, what it's doing, what it's done, and what it's about to do so you stay in control. To put AI to work for people, visit ServiceNow.com, support for decoder comes from Uber Advertising Whether it's ordering dinner, booking a ride, or shopping for groceries, we live in a world where we make decisions the moment a need arises. But these moments aren't just when people choose Uber, they're when people choose brands. Uber advertising helps brands understand the context behind those decisions, the moment, the need, and the mindset across mobility, delivery and commerce so brands can show up with great relevance when people are ready to act. Uber Advertising, where life's movement becomes your brand's momentum.

Learn [e-mail] advertising support for this show comes from BetterHelp. Summer can feel like a sprint. Kids home, trips to plan, routines flipped upside down. It's easy to slip into survival mode just trying to get through it. Then suddenly it's over and you're wishing you enjoyed the days just a little bit more. Therapy can help you slow down and actually be present for the moments that matter. With BetterHelp, you can connect with a licensed therapist from anywhere on your schedule. Don't just survive this summer. Thrive. Visit betterhelp.com VoxPods

[Neelai Patel]

hello and welcome to Decoder. I'm Neelai Patel, editor in chief of the Verge, and Decoder is my show

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

about big ideas and other problems.

[Neelai Patel]

My guest today is Hayden Field, the senior AI reporter here at the Verge. Often when Hayden shows up on Decoder,

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

it's because something has gone wrong in the world of AI.

[Neelai Patel]

And last weekend, that something was a pretty intense mix of Anthropic, the Trump administration, and Anthropic's new model, Claude Fable 5. On Friday, not even a week after Anthropic released Fable 5 to the public, the United States government said it was imposing export controls on that new model, as well as the underlying Mythos model that Fable is based on. Those controls restricted foreign nationals, even those working for Anthropic in the United States, from accessing these models. Anthropic then took Fable and Mythos offline for everyone because the company said it was worried it would not be able to restrict restrict access and reasonably comply with that order.

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

Otherwise, as you might imagine this is

[Neelai Patel]

all a giant mess. Peyton actually just published a fantastic play by play on the Verge about how this all went down last Friday and the scramble through the weekend from both sides to figure out exactly what happened and how it might all get resolved. So I wanted her to come on the show and walk me through the timeline and what it all means. The situation is ongoing. As of Tuesday, when we were recording this episode, Fable is still offline. In fact, if you boot up Claude, it tells you right above the chat box window when Fable 5 is currently unavailable, yet is as you'll hear Hayden explain whether Fable comes back online this week or not, the ripple effects of the government's feud with Anthropic have far reaching consequences for the tech industry and the United States AI regulatory regime.

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

There's also a big irony here, and

[Neelai Patel]

you'll hear Hayden and I talk about it quite a bit. Anthropic has spent years arguing that AI might soon be powerful enough to be dangerous and that the government needed to get serious about regulating AI sooner rather than later. Well, now we're here and Anthropic doesn't

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

love the way it's playing out.

[Neelai Patel]

And now everyone, but maybe especially the Chinese government, is watching to see whether the United States AI regulatory approach takes the shape of a serious safety framework or whether it's just another weapon for the White House to use against companies and people that don't bend the knee to the Trump administration.

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

Like I said, it's a real mess.

[Neelai Patel]

Okay, Verge senior AI reporter Hayden Field on the Claude Fable ban and the new AI regulatory landscape.

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

Here we go. Hayden Field, you're the senior AI reporter here at the Verge. Welcome back to Decoder.

[Hayden Field]

Thanks. Great to be here.

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

It's always chaos when you're here, Hayden. That's what I've come to discover.

[Hayden Field]

It really is.

Also, my rule is still in effect in that it's always a Friday stuff always hits the fan on a Friday,

and this was no different.

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

Particularly when it comes to the government regulating AI. There's a real what if it all went crazy on Friday, so we all had to think about it over the weekend. And then I think this has been basically true throughout the Trump administration. The scramble to put it all back together on Monday is immediate.

[Hayden Field]

Exactly.

It's crazy.

And the fact that all these talks were happening all over the weekend and then Monday, still no resolution.

I'm surprised that things aren't resolved yet. But yeah, lots of drama.

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

Well, this podcast is going to come out on a Thursday. We're recording On a Tuesday. We'll see what happens over the next two days. But I think the big picture here of how the United States government should regulate AI and what that means for American AI companies on the world stage is open. I don't think it's going to be resolved with whatever happens with Fable. So let's try to understand the whole story and then pull those themes out of it because they're just going to keep coming back around again and again and again, I think with every new model released now. So let's start at the start. What is Claude Mythos? What is Fable? How do they relate to each other?

[Hayden Field]

Great question.

And I asked them the same thing when they came out with this like a week ago or by the time we publish this, it'll be like a

week and a half ago. Because, yeah, AI companies are really bad

at naming things and it's always very confusing.

But the situation is Mythos is the underlying model that is powering both Mythos 5 and Fable 5.

Fable is a new thing. They haven't had Fable 1, 2, 3 or 4. They just immediately started with Fable 5. Very confusing.

But Fable is the watered down or safeguarded version of mythos 5. So when they came out with Mythos Preview in April, Anthropic kept saying, you know, they were really hyping it up. They were saying this is a, you know, potential, like, cyber weapon. It's got to be never released to the public, at least until safeguards catch up, etc. Etc. We're only going to release it to enterprise and governments, AKA cyber defenders is what they called them. You know, places that need to patch up all their frameworks before, you know, bad actors come in and exploit those vulnerabilities. Now fast forward to last week and they released not only mythos 5, which is the first, like, official Mythos before

it was Mythos Preview, so we skipped straight to five.

Then they also released on the same day Fable 5, which was the very first, like, public version of Mythos Class models, AKA same underlying framework, but now tons of safeguards built on top to hopefully stop the public from accessing this. Super dangerous, by Anthropic's own admission of

a model that could, you know, mess up everything.

So, yeah, that's what they released. And they spent a long time hyping this up and talking about how dangerous it was. And then it kind of came back to haunt them later.

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

So Fable is a Mythos with the security guardrails. And when it first came out, there was a wave of controversy, right? AI Researchers, security researchers found those guardrails were actually preventing them from doing research and seeing what Fable was capable of, because if they tried to push the boundary, it would downgrade them to Anthropic's previous models.

[Hayden Field]

Yeah, it became kind of like a meme, like people were making fun of

how strict the guardrails were when it came out.

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

So that's the thing that's confusing me where there's a controversy because the guardrails are so strict. And then something happened that made the government think Fable was so dangerous that it needed to be pulled. What happened?

[Hayden Field]

I talked to some independent red teamers about this, and before the Amazon white paper was circulating, before this allegation of a jailbreak was public, I talked to some red teamers about how safe Fable 5 was, and they were all pretty impressed with how the guardrails held up. Like they were. I was expecting it to be, you know, a little bit easier to jailbreak. They were saying they had tried a lot of stuff and nothing was working. So that's not my experience. When I usually talk to independent red teamers, they're like, yeah, I got it to break here, I got it to break there. In this case, they were saying it held up pretty well. Now, what happened this time is, according to a source familiar with the negotiations, who was directly involved with the negotiations that I spoke with yesterday. This is kind of the timeline of last week, mid last week, Anthropic was made aware of some research that Amazon researchers were doing and that they had, you know, uncovered a potential jailbreak, something they were pretty worried about. They sent it over to Anthropic. Anthropic was kind of going back and forth with the Amazon researchers talking about it, and they were discussing, like, whether it was really a jailbreak or whether it was, like, not that big of a deal, essentially. Apparently. Reports say that Amazon CEO Andy Jassy then got worried about it and called maybe Scott Besant, some member of the Trump administration, on Friday and talked about his concerns. Trump administration freaked out immediately. They immediately call Anthropic. They're like. They send them a message, actually, and they say, look, you need to shut this down in 90 minutes, and we need to figure out how to.

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

90 minutes?

[Hayden Field]

Yep, 90 minute ultimatum. And they said, we need to figure out how to fix this, this jailbreak that's come to light. Anthropic got on the phone with the Trump administration within 15 minutes of that first call, and they were asking for more, more details. They're like, okay, let's talk about this, you know, are you talking about the research we're already aware of? Are you talking about something different? What is the jailbreak you're talking about? Let's, you know, they're trying to get more details and, you know, talk to the administration. I think the administration was also mad that Dario Amade, the CEO of Anthropic, didn't call back until an hour and 15 minutes after that first call. So Anthropic called back 15 minutes in. It took Dario an hour and 15 minutes to call back. So there was a lot going on here. By the time, you know, they, they, they're talking, you know, whatever the 90 minute deadline passes, the Trump administration says, okay, that's it. Yep, we're hitting you with export controls. And so that is when they told Anthropic, no foreign national can use either of these models. And you have to just make sure that that is the case. No foreign national, whether they work at Anthropic or not. Ak, you know, if you're, say, bank of America and you have access to Mythos 5 and you're using it to plug vulnerabilities in your system and you're not a US Citizen, you can't use it. Same with, you know, a random, just regular individual using Fable 5. Same with a anthropic researcher who is not a US citizen.

So anthropic did the only thing it

could really do in this situation and

they said, okay, we gotta sideline both these models.

We can't confirm that, you know, we can't in like one minute figure out a way to make sure no non US citizens are using the models. So that's what happened. I mean, it was a crazy couple of hours. Anthropic comes out with a statement later that night saying they're trying to work with Trump administration on this. Spent all weekend virtually meeting with the Trump administration and then flying three employees out, who I detail in the piece we just published, to D.C. to talk to them in person. Notably, Dario was not there in person. He's virtually joining all these meetings. I can confirm he was not at a wellness retreat, which is what some

reports say, but they won't tell me where he is. But it's not at a wellness retreat.

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

That's all I'm saying. Not at a wellness retreat.

[Hayden Field]

It's on topics for you. So, yeah, there's a lot going on. Very dramatic.

All the sources I spoke with over the past couple days were saying the whole tech industry and the cybersecurity community in particular are just talking about how you know, one source told me, beijing

is laughing at us right now. It was interesting because some cybersecurity leaders

in the space came together to write a public letter and they said, look,

not all of us believe in regulation, but if you were going to regulate it, this is not the way, which I think is just kind of indicative of this whole situation.

[Neelai Patel]

We're going to pause here for a quick break.

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

We'll be right back.

[Sponsor Announcer]

Support for the show comes from ServiceNow. AI was supposed to handle the parts of the job you hate. Instead it just describes them, suggests what to do about them, and then leaves you to do it. That's not help, that's homework. ServiceNow's AI specialists are different. They're not a tool. Think of them as digital teammates who actually do the work from start to finish. Cases get resolved, requests get processed, loops get closed, and most importantly, no extra work for you. Because when you can truly delegate to AI, you can get back to the work. Only you can do the work. That requires a person with ideas and judgment and, you know, a pulse. To learn how to put AI to work for people, visit servicenow.com

support for

the show comes from Even Realities. Think about the last time you walked into a big meeting and wished your talking points could just stay with you without losing your place or your train of thought. Even Realities built Exactly that. Even G2 are productivity smart classes designed to keep real time support right in view with teleprompting, conversation support, real time translation, AI assistance, and more. They help you stay on top of work and daily life. And unlike most smart glasses, they're designed to look and feel like premium eyewear with no camera and a lightweight 36 gram design you can wear all day. The more contacts you give them, the smarter they get. Adapting to how you work and what you need. To learn more about even G2, go to evenrealities.com and see how everyday smart classes keep helpful information in sight so you can stay productive and hands free throughout the day. And for our listeners, use Promo code [e-mail] to get 10% off even ring one and or even clip when you add them to your even G2 order. That's even Realities Promo Code Decoder.

[Neelai Patel]

We're back with Verge senior AI reporter Hayden Field discussing Anthropic's new showdown with the US Government over AI regulation.

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

Maybe you believe in aggressive government regulation, maybe you don't. There's a way to operate the regulatory efforts that is rigorous and thoughtful and careful and predictable. Nothing about this seems like it was rigorous or thoughtful or predictable. I actually want to start at the beginning. Andy Jassy, Scott Bessant might be smart guys. They obviously have very senior positions in our society. They're not experts in AI. How did we get to Andy Jassy, the CEO of Amazon, relaying concerns about AI security research to Scott Besant, who does not really oversee AI policy in any like, meaningful way, and that resulting in a 90 minute ultimatum delivered to a company whose CEO is, is absent. Like all of that just, I don't think your politics should matter if you just examine that. You have to say either this is the worst security breach in history that the CEO of Amazon is going to call the Treasury Secretary, or this is just a bunch of guys who want to feel important. And I can't quite figure out which one it is.

[Hayden Field]

I think it's a combination of a couple things. One, it's the fact that like you mentioned, a lot of these guys are not experts in AI. And something that I'm not saying it's

not like any jailbreak of this is

obviously, you know, serious and worth considering. But I think that it's the type of thing when you don't have direct knowledge of how these systems work. You're going to take a really black and white immediate, like, I think that these guys weren't experts. Andy Jassy hears about this from his own researchers, his own researchers, by the way, who had been going back and forth with Anthropic for a couple days

on this so that they weren't, you know, calling the President about it.

They're like, okay, let's discuss this and kind of, you know, figure out what we can do here.

The researchers allegedly didn't seem to think it was, you know, the end of the world.

They're just like, oh, we, we uncovered this. You know, let's, let's discuss Anthropic was working on it. And then Andy Jassy hears about it, he makes this call, everything hits the fan, which makes sense because if you are not an AI expert, and even if you are an AI expert, maybe you're not an expert on cybersecurity and how exactly these systems work. Of course. So you're going to freak out. I mean, it's kind of understandable. But what is really strange is what happened after that. So, you know, making this phone call, the administration becoming aware. Okay, but what I think is really weird is the 90 minute ultimatum, them not giving them additional details, when they said, hey, let's talk about it. Are you talking about the Vulnerability we're already aware of. Are you talking about something else? And can you just tell us about it so then we can talk about it? They said no, 90 minutes, do it or die.

And then making it so that no foreign national can access the system ever.

That is what's really strange, just kind

of the way all these cards fell

is everyone in the tech industry thinks is just really strange. And it's kind of indicative of, like you mentioned, the way that the Trump administration has been operating with tech. A lot of times it's. It seems to be President Trump has one conversation and he's kind of swayed from that most recent conversation. So, you know, he's been very anti regulation, very pro American AI, advancing exporting American AI, which is something that the Commerce Department is requesting. It has an RFI out on right now. They're all about exporting American AI and like, you know, advancing and beating China.

But then they do this thing that kind of kneecaps everyone with no notice

and could very well impact not just anthropic, but also OpenAI, Google, every competitor in the space that also has what they call a semi equivalent Mythos product.

So, yeah, there's just, it's. It's really. It seems really disorganized.

And it's very interesting that, you know, this often ends up in a scramble with all these CEOs kind of trying to race to kowtow to the Trump administration without really being grounded a lot of times in science or evidence that

really, like, matches what's going on. I feel like the level of freakout is not usually matching, you know, the, the evidence there.

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

But Amazon is an investor in Anthropic. They're a major partner. Why did Andy Jassy kneecap his own investment in this way?

[Hayden Field]

Well, Amazon typically, like, does a lot of red teaming, just normally, you know, it's kind of just part of their process. So it makes sense that this would have been tested and then unearthed. But what's interesting is why Andy Jassy called the Trump administration about it. I'm not sure. Maybe it was a typical call that was already happening and he just happened to mention something offhand. Maybe he was calling them and saying, yeah, good thing you did the executive order, because XYZ don't know. But what is interesting, and I'm glad you asked this, because a lot of the sources I spoke with said that the stuff in the alleged jailbreak and in the Amazon white paper that's been circulating, all of it could be achieved by OpenAI's GPT 5.5 and some other models. So that's the allegation that this is not. These skills are not unique to Fable 5. The skills in question as part of the jailbreak mythos is obviously more powerful than Fable because it doesn't have safeguards. But when it comes to Fable and the problems that were brought to light by Amazon, it seems like those problems are not unique to fable and that GPT 5.5 can also achieve those. So it's like something that a lot of people in the industry are asking is, why anthropic?

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

So a real element of this is that it's always anthropic. Anthropic has the most contentious relationship with the Trump administration. They were designated as supply chain risk by the Department of War. But the posture here is different than the usual anthropic drama. Historically, Anthropic has said, we don't want you to use our tools for X, Y and Z. And the Trump administration has said, no, we get to do whatever we want with the AI tools. That's why they were designated supply chain risk by the Department of Work. They said, we have some red lines about how we want to be used in the military context. And Pete Hegset said, nope, I'm going to do whatever I want. You have to allow all lawful purposes. That's the line. And because you won't, you're a supply chain risk. There's a lawsuit that's being argued about here. It's the opposite. The Trump administration is worried that the model is too powerful and can be used for too many things. And Anthropic seems to think that that belief is overblown, that the administration is overplaying a thing that they can fix. They just need the time to do it and, you know, some rigor and conversation about how effective their fix is. How do you put that together? That on the one hand, the Trump administration is anti AI regulatory efforts. On the one hand, they say we get to do whatever we want with the models, make them as powerful as you can, and then here, the model is too powerful and has to be pulled before any foreign national can even look at it.

[Hayden Field]

The administration is trusting these companies to kind of tell it what it should be doing. We've seen that a bunch with, you

know, any regulation that has happened or like it has become voluntary.

You know, lots of drafts have been adjusted after the Trump administration talks to AI companies. They already don't like Anthropic. You know, there's already a big trust breakdown between the two from the supply Chain risk thing from the lawsuit, from drawing red lines. And so I can't imagine that this exact situation would have played out if

this had been a competitor.

I mean, OpenAI has a mythos semi equivalent. Again, like, you know, no company is really saying theirs is as good, but they say it's, you know, pretty good. Microsoft, Google, I can't. I think that the freakout would have still happened, but I cannot imagine the rest of it would have played out

the way it was.

I think they would have given them more time. I think they would have had more of a conversation. And I don't think they would have made this foreign nationals rule that has,

like, you know, sent shockwaves through the

whole industry and the world. One of the sources I spoke with said he already knew that backup contracts were being signed with non US Companies right now. Open weight models were being deployed on alternative hardware arrangements. Because now companies everywhere are saying, oh, wow, we got to make political risk part of our business plan now. We don't really know what's going to happen with American AI. Let's make some backup plans here, which is not good for the industry. And so I think it's just interesting that the Trump administration is so afraid of China overtaking us, yet they're kind of willing to kneecap one of their champions, as it were, in the industry. But I also think it's interesting that the reasoning from the Trump administration that's been coming out day by day seems to differ. So every day they seem to have kind of a new excuse or part of the conversation that's coming to light. So first they say, oh, well, what if China had access? A source I spoke with said that's a rumor from a few weeks ago, from way before Fable 5 or Mythos 5 came out and that it was referencing, like, a Chinese telecom company that the administration had previously approved to have access to Mythos Preview.

[Helen Havlik]

And.

[Hayden Field]

And that when the administration said, oh, actually, you know what, we changed our mind, let's take them off, Anthropic immediately took them off and revoked that access. So I think that's an old rumor. Then we're also seeing the executive order thing where, you know, rumors have come to light that, oh, Anthropic wasn't complying with the Trump administration's executive order. Well, that executive order, it hasn't got into effect yet. They only.

He only signed it on June 2nd. It's like, you know, two weeks ago. It takes 60 days for them to

figure out which models are going to be covered under it. There was A voluntary, you know, partnership of like a 30 day pre release review. It's voluntary.

So I just think, you know, I'm not, it's funny because I'm not like, oh, anthropic is totally in the right here at all. But it's just interesting because in this

situation there's just, there's so much like misdirection and scrambling and just weirdness that it's rare that you see me feeling kind of bad for an AI company.

It really is. Like, I am not like, oh, yeah, like they're doing great. All AI companies have their own issues. But in this one case I'm like, wow. Like, I really don't know if this would have happened to OpenAI or, or another competitor after, you know, just all the drama and throb has been going

through with the Trump administration. We know the Trump administration can be

petty and I think, you know, they

would have freaked out for any company

that was under this situation. But I think, I don't know, I

can't see it playing out the exact

same way with a competitor.

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

Is it just as simple as Dario Amade doesn't go to the White House, he doesn't give Trump gifts. I mean, Sam Altman does press conferences with Donald Trump. Sundar Pichai attended the inauguration.

[Hayden Field]

Zuckerberg was at the UFC fight.

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

Notable AI winner Mark Zuckerberg was at the UFC fight trying to buy his way into success. Is it just that simple that he. There's a personality clash here.

[Hayden Field]

That's the way it's been perceived by some reports. I mean, I think that's definitely part of it. You know, some reports have said, you know, he doesn't know how to talk to the administration, you know, in that he doesn't kowtow as much. He doesn't, you know, know how to play the game. I think that's part of it. I think the other part of it is that the Trump administration isn't quite sure how they're gonna regulate things. And they're being, you know, President Trump is being like, pulled in different directions, but by any conversation he has. Sometimes he feels like it needs to be more regulated, sometimes he thinks it needs to be less. Like if he's talking to AI CEO, it seems like he's like, yeah, you know what? I trust them, we're good, let them go ahead. We gotta beat China. In other cases, you know, he sees, you know, the public is going through a pretty anti AI era right now. You know, there's a lot, there's a rise in AI populism. And you know, he's saying, oh well, actually the Everman kind of doesn't like aio. Maybe I should regulate. So I think that there's just, it's kind of something we've seen with the administration a bunch over the past however many years, but now it's that it's being represented in AI regulation. It's just there's not really a rhyme or reason right now. And I don't think that Anthropic's communications with the administration help, you know, if you don't take their call the second they call. If you're not, you know, flying to the White House to have dinner, it probably hurts your relationship a little bit. In a presidency that seems to be pretty relationship based, a lot of the

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

time it's just a handful of guys and how they feel and that seems to be our regulatory apparatus.

[Neelai Patel]

We have taken a short break. We'll be back in just a minute.

[Sponsor Announcer]

Support for the show comes from Framer. If your team wants a website that looks and feels handcrafted but is still fast to ship, Framer is built for that. You design on a visual canvas with responsive layouts, hosting and a CMS built in so the work is production ready. From day one, agents work alongside you to draft pages and polish sections. Then you review and publish what goes live. Framer is the pro site builder for creators, teams and businesses that want a professional site and care enough to get every detail right. Agents solve the gap between AI generated ideas and production ready website work. Learn how you can get more out of your site from a Framer specialist or get started building for free [e-mail] decoder for 30% off a Framer Pro annual plan. That's framer.com decoder for 30 percent off framer.com decoder rules and restrictions may apply.

[Neelai Patel]

Hi everyone. This segment of decoder sessions features Helen Havlik, the publisher of the Verge, and Christy Argilon, Uber's global head of Advertising,

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

and you're going to enjoy this conversation.

[Sponsor Announcer]

Christy, just to start, when did Uber launch advertising and how is it going?

[Helen Havlik]

It's been a really interesting journey for Uber. Most people came to know Uber as we alternative to a ride hailing service. But the other side of the platform is Uber Eats, and the Uber Eats side was where we first got into advertising with simple sponsored listings so that any restaurant on our platform could actually run ads. We started to realize we have this platform that is full of people going places and getting things and there's no better way to show brand relevancy than to insert your brand into decision making in the moment that it's happening and to help facilitate and provide offers information services at the moment people are making decisions.

[Hayden Field]

What makes Uber advertising unique as a product?

[Helen Havlik]

Well, one of the things that we keep seeing in our research with consumers is that there is this enormous trend to use digital as quickly as possible to make decisions so that they can get back into the physical world. And we see that over and over again on the Uber platform. People are looking to quickly find a ride to get to a bar where they can meet friends and watch their favorite football team together. And so this pivot from the digital world, enhancing what people really want to do in the physical world, is a role that Uber plays that's incredibly powerful.

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

We're back with Verge senior AI reporter

[Neelai Patel]

Hayden Field discussing why anthropic keeps finding itself in the crosshairs of the Trump administration.

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

The Biden administration, like notable for a lack of personality and people, was very technocratic, very rules based in a way that I think people often thought was bloodless. But the Biden administration, they did put forward an executive order that had things like transparency reviews and research requirements for the frontier models. Trump came into office, he wiped all that out. He said, we're not going to regulate these companies. And now it seems like we're just headed back there, right? If you're going to put out an ultra powerful model, the administration wants control of it. Certainly they will use the bluntest instrument they have in the form of export controls. But we're going to get back to a more fine grained, more rigorous approach to how these models are deployed and used and who gets to use them. Was it a mistake to wipe out the Biden framework? Are we headed back to that framework? Where do we think this goes now?

[Hayden Field]

I could see us going back there because a lot of activists and academics, I interviewed a ton of people in the industry at the time, like ranging across a ton of different viewpoints, and most of them believed that the Biden era executive order wasn't quite enough. Some people thought it was a good first step. And I think that's why I could see us going back there, because it wasn't seen as being extremely aggressive. If anything, it was seen as being like, you know, a good first step in the direction, but really just one rung on the ladder, you know, And I think that that's why I could see, you know, the current administration going back there because it wasn't that far. You know, I will say AI companies will Lobby against even that little step. They did, but I mean, yeah, they did. They did deeply. But I could see it being, you know, going back there, but a little more voluntary, which again, all these things usually get watered down. It's like they come out with swinging and then they talk to some AI CEOs and they're like, oh, okay, let's roll it back a little bit.

So.

So who knows, honestly? But the reason I became an AI reporter is because I felt like there was no real regulation in the space. And this was even before ChatGPT. And journalism is a way to kind of shine a light on what's going on in the industry. And I think still six years later, we're not seeing a lot of regulation

and any that has happened got rolled back. So maybe we'll go back in that direction. I do see us going somewhere there,

but maybe not even as much as that first rung.

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

It almost feels like the industry needs to push for a more considered regulatory approach.

[Sponsor Announcer]

Right?

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

That they need to say this is chaos, this can't be how we operate. Every new model can't be forced to contend with panicked phone calls on the weekend. What kind of system would you build, Right. If you wanted a more rigorous review process here is it. They just submit their models to the government and the government says what's dangerous and not. Is it more industry based? What are the solutions being proposed?

[Hayden Field]

There haven't been a lot of really robust solutions proposed recently because of this current administration. They've had a really light touch approach to regulation. So, you know, no one's really surfacing those now that that might be changing. I think we'll be, we'll see more robust frameworks proposed and I just hope that they're not voluntary. AI companies already do a lot of voluntary stuff. If you're gonna regulate, do it.

You know, there's not.

I don't think you need to. There's a lot of different opinions on how light touch or heavy touch regulation should be. But I do think that voluntary frameworks are pretty, pretty watered down. You know what I mean? It's like we already have those. So what's next? You know, there's a big. I think it's important to remember how like the general public feels because this is who AI is really affecting at the end of the day. And yeah, the rate, the rise in AI populism and the fact that people are upset. There's data center protests going on everywhere. People are even in extreme cases like attacking AI CEOs homes or attempting to. There Is a lot of disquiet here, and people feel like they're getting replaced. They feel like their jobs are getting replaced. You know, I was listening to a Seattle city council hearing recently, and a lot of AI engineers were testifying, saying that they got laid off because of AI, and they were engineers. So I. I think both AI leaders and the government often kind of are pretty distanced from what the general public is feeling about this technology. And it's important to note. So I think, you know, we'll see how that impacts, if at all, regulation that comes out. I don't have high hopes for a lot of regulation under this administration because they can be really sway. You know, I think, like, you know, they have dinner one time, and then things might shift a little bit. And to be fair, like, many politicians are that way, but. But, you know, we'll see. Maybe after this executive order, you know, the 60 days are up, maybe we see some changes that surprise me.

I don't know.

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

One of the weirder aspects of this is that Anthropic itself is the company that most pushes for regulation, that most sounds the alarm, is the most doomerish of all the companies. Jack Clark, one of the co founders of Anthropic, recently put out research, and his conclusion was that, quote, we believe it would be good for the world to have the option to slow or temporarily pause frontier AI development to enable societal structures and alignment research to. To keep up with the advance of the technology. Anthropic is way on the front line of saying, oh, we might kill everyone. Boy, we should stop this. But they're also on the front line of model capability. Right. By all accounts, Mythos is the most powerful model that exists today. Is Anthropic just getting itself in trouble? Is this just marketing strategy for them that's backfiring?

[Hayden Field]

I think it's a combination. I think that the marketing speak is definitely backfiring. If you say something's that dangerous and then a researcher unearth something that maybe wasn't quite meant to be possible, yeah,

people are gonna freak out. And so that's why I'm kind of

like, you know, I can see the first thing happening to anyone.

I can't see the rest of it the way that the cards felt.

But, yeah, I think it's partly there. You know, it came back to haunt them. You know, it was a little bit on them in terms of the hype.

But I also think that they are

trying to be honest in some ways about the risk that this technology can pose. And, you know, it would be really bad if a system that can flag high level vulnerabilities in our global infrastructure

that we use, like your bank system

or, you know, a government website, could just be used by bad actors if it fell into the wrong hands. Yeah, that's pretty bad. And so, you know, I think it comes down to communication, like, yep, it's important to talk about the risks and not downplay them. But also, you know, if you do that and then you make a mistake or something unexpected happens, you gotta deal with the consequences. So, yeah, there's, there's a lot to unpack there for sure. And I also think that, you know, a lot of companies do downplay risks of different systems. Like, you know, we've seen a bunch of AI CEOs, including anthropic, I believe, talk about how, you know, jobs aren't all gonna be replaced. It's okay. You know, there's.

I always take all this stuff with

a huge grain of salt because at the end of the day, whatever AI company you're talking about, whether it's anthropic or not, they all have the incentives to turn a profit and make money at all costs. And especially if they become a public company, which they are about to. So people like to paint Anthropic one way and other competitors another, but they're

all, they're all pursuing the same goal. They just are doing it a little bit differently.

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

Is there a version of this where we just treat AI like military technology from the jump and the public gets watered down version of the military technology? Because that seems to be the risk profile that the Trump administration is operating within. Right. This is fundamentally offensive technology. We can deploy it against our enemies, we can use it to attack the banks. Everyone is worried about the security implications here. Is there a world in which we just start there and then say to deploy to the public, to consumers, you got to cut this way down. We're not going to sell F22s to the public, but we can sell Ford Raptors to the public. Like there's some version of this, right, where it's like the technology gets cut way down for the public with the, the bleeding edge just fundamentally for the military.

[Hayden Field]

Yeah, I mean, that's like what we've seen a lot for decades.

And I think it's starting to happen

now with the Mythos stuff. You know, Fable is the watered down version and, you know, enterprise and governments have access to the more powerful version. There's a lot of different opinions that. Like OpenAI, one of its biggest marketing Pushes right now is, oh, Anthropic wants, you know, the most powerful AI to only be in the hands of the elites, and we want to bring it to the public. So there's a bunch of different marketing pushes right now. Everyone's just kind of using everything to their advantage or to paint their competitors badly, Anthropic included. So it's like, you know, I think the race is just heating up so intensely that, you know, the AI companies at the forefront are doing anything they can to win at all costs, some because they think that they are the best and most moral winner, which I think can always be a big issue. As we've seen in, like, every. Every sci fi or, you know, fantasy

movie, the for the greater good thing is typically used by, you know, the villain in the story. So I think it's. I don't know, it's.

There's a big race happening right now,

and I totally agree with Jack Clark that, you know, it might be good to slow things down a bit.

If everyone could agree. If everyone could agree, which is very, you know, a huge long shot and, you know, especially it'd be very difficult to get other countries to agree as well. But we are definitely building the technology much faster than we can think about the implications of it, and we have been for a long time.

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

I think this first episode of Dakota where Dario Amade was directly compared to Thanos. So that's great.

[Hayden Field]

To be fair, I was thinking about the guy in Harry Potter when I said that.

[Sponsor Announcer]

What was it?

[Hayden Field]

Grindelwald. Grindelwald.

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

Oh, my gosh. All right, well, Dario, if you want to come on and address these allegations, you're more than welcome.

[Hayden Field]

Also, gotta say, it's not just dario. All the AI CEOs are saying that. All of them. It's like they're all. Yeah, it's crazy.

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

Where does this end? What are the next steps here? There's meetings happening this week. People are gonna be hearing this on Thursday. There's a chance Anthropic is just back on the market. There's a chance it's not. But after this, it seems like everybody wants a process. Where do you think this ends?

[Hayden Field]

Honestly, it's very difficult to predict how this administration is going to act. As we saw with the supply chain risk thing, even though a lot of government agencies were big fans of Claude, I thought that that was going to be rolled back eventually. But they just signed deals with seven other companies and said, okay, we're good. Even if you guys were fans of Claude, whatever, here are seven other options for you, it's anyone's guess right now. I do think that the foreign nationals thing is going to be rolled back. I mean, I just can't imagine that after all the hubbub that the administration

has created about American AI has to win.

The Hegseth memo from January 9 about how speed at all costs.

I just think this administration is so focused on winning an AI that there's

no way they're going to continue with that rule.

But who knows? So I think I could see this

becoming a personality game over the next few days. Anthropic compromises in some way, they try to communicate better, whatever, and then in a couple of days this gets rolled back. But then, you know, I've seen some rumors that the Trump administration is trying to have a stake in Anthropic and OpenAI an ownership stake. So, you know, there could be a lot of different resolutions. Quote, quote to that here. We'll see. But I definitely, I can't foresee this as it exists right now, now continuing for more than a couple of days. I mean, the industry is just aghast at this.

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

Hayden, we're going to obviously have to have you back very soon as this comes to a close. Thank you so much for being on Decoder.

[Hayden Field]

Thanks so much.

[Host (possibly Nilay Patel)]

I'd like to thank Hayden Field for

[Neelai Patel]

taking the time to join Decoder and thank you for listening. I hope you enjoyed it. If you'd like to let us know what you thought about this episode or really anything else at all, drop us a line. You can email us atdecoder the verge.com they really do read every email. Or you can hit me up directly on Threads or Bluesky. We're also on YouTube. You can watch full episodes at Decoder Pod. It's the same handle on TikTok and on Instagram Coder Pod. They're a lot of fun. If you like Decoder, please share it with your friends and subscribe over to your podcast. If you really like the show, hit us with that five star review. Decoder is a production of the Verge and part of the Vox Media Podcast Network show is produced by Kate Cox. Nick Statt Edited by Ursa Wright. Our editorial director is Kevin McShane. The Decoder Music is by Breakmaster Cylinder. We'll see you next time.

[Sponsor Announcer]

Support for this show comes from Odoo. Running a business is hard enough, so why make it harder? With a dozen different apps that don't talk to each other? Introducing Odoo. It's the only business software you'll ever need. It's an all in one fully integrated platform that makes your work easier. CRM, accounting, inventory, E commerce, and more. And the best part? Odoo replaces multiple expensive platforms for a fraction of the cost. That's why over thousands of businesses have made the switch. So why not you try Odoo for [e-mail] that's o d o o.com

the right window treatments change everything. Your sleep, your privacy, the way every room looks and feels. @blinds.com, we've spent 30 years making it surprisingly simple to get exactly what your home needs. We've covered over 25 million windows and have 50,000 five star reviews to prove we deliver. Whether you DIY Wyatt or want a pro to handle everything from measure to install, we have you covered. Real design professionals, free samples. Zero pressure right now. Get up to 50% off with minimum purchase plus get a free professional [e-mail] rules and restrictions apply.

Athletic Brewing Company crafts award winning non alcoholic beers for those who want to be part of every round. With over 185 flavor awards, they're exceptional NA beers that fit your lifestyle and and any social occasion. Summer's full of good times and Athletic fits right in. Go to athleticbrewing.com to have brews delivered to your door or find them at a bar, restaurant or store near you. Near Beer Athletic Brewing Co.

Fit for all Times.