Loading summary
Transcript38 lines
- [00:01]
Outshift by Cisco Representative
This show is supported by Outshift, Cisco's incubation engine. Today's AI agents operate in silos, limiting their true potential. We've been focused on building bigger, smarter models, but scaling up is just one approach. To reach superintelligence together, we need to do more, we need to scale out, and we actually have a blueprint from 70,000 years ago. Humans didn't just get smarter individually. The cognitive revolution transformed society because we began sharing knowledge, goals and innovation, agents are now at that same inflection point. They can connect, but they can't think together. That's why Outshift by Cisco is building the Internet of Cognition, transforming AI from isolated systems into orchestrated superintelligence. By creating an open, interoperable infrastructure, Outshift by Cisco is enabling agents and humans to share intent, context, and reasoning. The cognitive evolution for agents is here. Explore the Internet of cognition@outshift.com that's out
- [01:06]
Servil Representative
Every company says AI will make employees more productive, but most employees are still stuck waiting on it. Waiting for app access, waiting for password resets, waiting for someone to fix a laptop issue so they can get back to work. That operational drag adds up fast, and IT teams are overwhelmed trying to keep up. Servil was built to automate that work. You describe what you want automated in plain English and Servl builds it for you. No complicated workflow builders, no consultants, just faster support and fewer tickets slowing everyone down. Servil positions IT as the AI powered operational backbone of the company, not just a support function. The company guarantees customers can automate 50% of it tickets and backs it up with a free four week pilot. Learn more or start a free four week pilot at servol.com uncanny that's S E R val.com uncanny servil.com uncanny welcome
- [02:11]
Zoe Schiffer
to Wired's Uncanny Valley. I'm Zoe Schiffer, Director of Business and Industry.
- [02:15]
Brian Barrett
I'm Brian Barrett, Executive Editor.
- [02:18]
Zoe Schiffer
Today on the show, we're bringing you a special, shorter episode to explain the latest escalation between Anthropic and the Trump administration. Over the past weekend, the Trump administration unexpectedly imposed a export controls on Anthropic's latest models, Fable 5 and Mythos 5, basically ordering the company to bar access to quote, any foreign national, whether inside or outside the United States. In response, Anthropic disabled access to these models for all users to make sure they could comply with the directive. Now Anthropic executives are reportedly in Washington, D.C. to speak with the Trump administration officials and figure out how they can resolve this impasse.
- [02:56]
Brian Barrett
So this is remarkable. It's also. It's our first emergency podcast.
- [02:59]
Zoe Schiffer
So very exciting.
- [03:00]
Brian Barrett
This news unfolded on Friday, pretty late. What was your reaction when it came down? It came past your way?
- [03:08]
Zoe Schiffer
I mean, it was unprecedented. I don't think we've seen export controls applied in this way. Obviously, this is just the latest escalation in an ongoing fight between Anthropic and this administration. But it also seems like it comes on the heels of Anthropic really drumming up a lot of hype around how powerful and scary its models are. And so there was a little bit of irony of, like, wow, you tell everyone that your models are really. They can do incredibly capable things. They're too powerful for their own good, and eventually people will believe you.
- [03:45]
Brian Barrett
This part of the story goes back to April or so. So Anthropic has this model called Mythos, and they say, look, it's so good at cybersecurity, things specific like finding bugs in code and creating exploits for it, that we cannot release it to the general public. We are going to give it to a few trusted partners so that they have time to defend themselves before we release it to the public. Like, very scary stuff. And, look, people have said different. There are varying views on how essential that was. Is that fair to say?
- [04:21]
Servil Representative
Yeah.
- [04:22]
Zoe Schiffer
So I think actually we need to back up even further, because the Mythos release, I know it came after Anthropic had gotten gone head to head with the Department of Defense, basically saying that it wanted guardrails on how the military could use its models. The Department of Defense did not want those guardrails in place. And so there was a standoff. And by the time they released Mythos, it kind of looked like, well, whether this was the intention or not, it was getting Anthropic back in the administration's good graces. And we talked to sources in a variety of different levels who said that while relations between the Pentagon and Anthropic were still pretty isolated, relationships between Anthropic and the intelligence community were actually starting to thaw. So it looked like these talks had been successful, and at least the White House was in communication with Anthropic as a result of the Mythos release.
- [05:17]
Brian Barrett
So then we get to the point where Anthropic says, okay, people have had time to ready their defenses in light of this powerful model we're going to release. They go ahead and say, all right, we're releasing this on June 9th as Claude Fable 5. They say, hey, we're putting this in public, but we are making it so that you cannot use it for cybersecurity, you cannot use it for biological weapons. I think there were a few restrictions they put on it and they said, look, we tested this up and down. We red teamed it, which is the phrase for you treat it as though you were an attacker. And you can't jailbreak this thing. It's solid. It's not going to do the bad things. Go forth.
- [05:59]
Zoe Schiffer
Exactly. So basically, they were releasing a Mythos class model, but with a bunch of safeguards in place. And what that meant is that if you asked the model questions about how to create a bioweapon or what have you, the model would basically refuse to answer.
- [06:14]
Brian Barrett
Yeah, can't do that.
- [06:15]
Zoe Schiffer
But then after the release, Amazon CEO Andy Jassy calls the administration and basically flags a jailbreak that would essentially allow someone to bypass the model's guardrails and potentially get it to do bad things. Jesse wasn't the only person to make this call, but he's the only one we know about right now.
- [06:35]
Brian Barrett
Yeah, and obviously we don't know exactly how that unfolded, but it's interesting that
- [06:39]
Zoe Schiffer
it came from a competitor, a competitor who is invested in Anthropic. So it's a complicated web. What happens next is pretty widely disputed between the White House administration officials and Anthropic. But basically the White House says that they call Anthropic and try and get CEO Dario Amadei on the phone, but they were unable to reach him because he was supposedly at a wellness retreat. Anthropic vehemently denies that this was the case.
- [07:12]
Brian Barrett
Either way, he'll need one after this.
- [07:13]
Zoe Schiffer
Yeah, for sure, for sure. Regardless, they get on the phone, looks like, you know, an hour and 15 minutes after the request was made to have that call. And Dario basically tries to get more information about the jailbreak. Like what was going on, how serious was it? Why is the White House flipping out? It looks like Anthropic didn't believe this was as big a deal as the White House believed it was, and there was some disagreement about the severity of what they had found. In any case, the administration asks Anthropic to voluntarily remove the models. And Dario, importantly, doesn't commit to doing that. It doesn't look like he said no, but they get off the call and there's not the commitment. And so then the next turn is that the administration imposes export control.
- [08:01]
Brian Barrett
Yeah, it says you can't let anyone access this who is a foreign national, but of course, there's no real way to guarantee that unless you Just shut them down altogether. So, Zoe, that's our timeline, and there's a lot to unpack here. The thing that I'm sort of my mind immediately went to this, and I still kind of struggle with is the underlying logic of what is going on here. So if Mythos class frontier models are too powerful to be released to the general public, unless you can promise that they aren't actually going to be jail, you can't jailbreak them. Where do you go from here? Because eventually all these frontier models are going to be at Mythos class or better. They're all going to be this powerful. And there's really. One of Anthropic's arguments was, look, you can't make a model that's entirely 100% jailbreak proof. Like, you can prevent sort of big, universal jailbreaks, but if you're looking for little things that are going to break here and there, you're not going to be able to fix that. So where does the US Go from here?
- [09:01]
Zoe Schiffer
I think that it's still very much an open question, and one that every frontier AI company is asking itself right now. We know that OpenAI and the other labs, they're having serious discussions internally about, like, well, what do we do? Even if they haven't gotten, you know, a similar directive from the Trump administration, like, all of these companies are releasing new models all the time, and I think there's a lot of fear in the valley right now about, you know, how do we ensure that we don't end up in the same situation as Anthropic. I will say a couple things. One, I think, obviously, given the history that we already discussed, Anthropic has a much larger, worse relationship with the Trump administration than basically any other company. And this is definitely a line that Anthropic sources are hinting at. This wouldn't have happened to someone else. Basically, this is because I'm paraphrasing completely, but, like, this is because they hate us.
- [09:54]
Brian Barrett
Yeah.
- [09:55]
Zoe Schiffer
And then I think there's this question about, well, was the jailbreak, was it really, really serious, or was it something that was a little more tailored and narrow and the administration didn't have, like, the technical expertise to, like, understand? I think, you know, the administration is saying, look, Amazon brought this to us. We ran it by cybersecurity experts up and down the administration, and they said it was really serious. We believe we have. I think the word was proof. But Anthropic is still seemingly disputing that.
- [10:25]
Brian Barrett
Well, because what Anthropic is saying is like, look, the stuff that you can, the capabilities you can unlock with this jailbreak are already available on other models that have been out there for a while. Like, you're not introducing any, you're not introducing any unique risk with this specific jailbreak that you don't already have in some of these other models. And that sort of ties into. Some of the most vocal defenders of Anthropic were cybersecurity professionals. There was a big open letter from cybersecurity folks and tech CEOs saying, look, however worried you are about this, we're more worried because while this, while Mythos class models are good at offensive hacking, they're also really good at defense. And we need that help with defense because there are other models out there that are going to help people attack us. It's an interesting sort of trade off that I don't know that the administration has really fully weighed.
- [11:21]
Zoe Schiffer
No, and I think that some of the pushback we are seeing is like, how are we supposed to compete with China when China is releasing really advanced open source models, anyone can use them. And in the US we can no longer use general, generally speaking, like the most capable models we have access to. And I don't think the administration has a really strong answer to that, at least not yet. This is also coming at a time when AI policy within the White House is being pretty hotly contested. Even within the White House, like David Sachs, who was the AI on Crypto Czar, is no longer in his kind of official position. Susie Wiles and Michael Kratzios are kind of like running part of that show. But I think there's a lot of disagreement even within the administration about the right way forward. Are expert controls the right move? If not, how do we control these things? How much should the administration be weighing in on models before they are released? Because this is happening shortly after Trump released an executive order saying that they wanted AI companies to voluntarily give them kind of a preview about the most capable models before a general release.
- [12:30]
Brian Barrett
At the same time, you've got Dean Ball, who's briefly in the Trump administration, who is an AI policy expert, never shy with his opinions, said it was, quote, simply cartoonish that an administration that supports exporting advanced AI chips to China would at the same time say no US Allies, no foreign national could have access to its best models. What do you think happens from here, Zoe? What are the next steps? We know anthropic officials are trying to meet with the White House, going to hammer it out, but what's the short term and I think more importantly, the
- [13:04]
Zoe Schiffer
long term implications, I would be surprised if they don't reach some sort of agreement that results in Mythos and Fable being generally available. Maybe they'll have more guardrails in place, maybe there will be some sort of formal review process. But I would expect that there is just a lot of demand for frontier AI and the idea that in the United States people cannot access models that are as powerful as what people have access to in China, I don't think that's going to be a palatable solution. I also think that every frontier AI company is scrambling right now to figure out how they can make sure they have good lines with the Trump administration, that the Trump administration is aware of what models they have coming and that they maintain the appearance of being on better terms. Because Anthropic has really been winning the kind of PR war on a lot of fronts by saying we're the safe AI company. We were willing to go head to head with the Trump administration in order to keep people safe and not let them have unfettered access to RAI for military purposes. We won't put ads in our model. Now there's an opportunity to basically make them look like they're being messy, that they're moving quick, that they don't have good ties with the administration. And I think that that's an opportunity that anthropic competitors are not going to let pass them by.
- [14:27]
Brian Barrett
Zoe, so much of this conversation, both literally the one we're having right now and also just broadly, is about things happening at the CEO level and the heights of the administration and the strategic level. What does all of it mean for your average Claude user, someone who uses Anthropic? How does this impact them? What are the implications for them going forward in terms of their AI usage?
- [14:54]
Zoe Schiffer
My feeling is that it doesn't have a huge implication for the average user. I think the reality is that most people are using Claude and ChatGPT, like Google. They're just using a fraction of the capabilities of these models, which makes sense. Like these models, at the end of the day, they're like open text boxes and they require a lot from a user in terms of what do you want to do and knowing how to kind of direct them effectively. So I think if you're the average person and you've been using Claude, I honestly don't think you'll see a huge difference. You probably weren't on the bleeding cutting edge of pushing these models and what they can do. You will continue to have a good experience. I think the implication years down the road in terms of what this means for us AI and the trickle down effect for users, that still is an open question. But what do you think, Brian?
- [15:49]
Brian Barrett
No, I agree. I think unless you were planning on making a biological weapon, you're probably not going to feel too much of a pinch. Especially the Mythos class model had only been out for a few days before it got yanked. So even if you had started using it and found, oh my gosh, this can do things that I didn't know AI could do for me, which is not really going to be the case for almost anybody then. Yeah, I agree. I think you're not even going to notice or even be vaguely aware of it. But yeah, long term, it's a little bit of a mess. And that mess is going to have implications for how AI gets developed in the United States, when things get released, how well it keeps up. So I think not much for now. And long term, I think it's a bigger question of does the average person need AI that's much more powerful in any case, and how long it'll take to get there?
- [16:37]
Zoe Schiffer
Yeah, ultimately, I think really powerful AI is important for the people building the layer of apps on top of the models. It's like, maybe you could do really cool things that would then turn into interesting consumer products, and those will require better and better models. But there's an interesting split happening right now because we're hearing more and more about how unpopular AI is. You and I have talked about the college students booing commencement speakers who bring up the technology on stage. And then there's the fact that usage of AI has like, absolutely skyrocketed in recent years and doesn't appear to be tapering off. Like, people hate the technology overall. They use it all the time, and they also use it in a kind of surface level way that might not be pushing the absolute bleeding edge of. Of what the models are capable of.
- [17:28]
Brian Barrett
Yeah, I will take a little bit of a sideways approach here too, though, in that if there is an impact on the average Claude user or just the average Internet user, I do think there is something to the fact that, look, hackers have access to all these open source models and they are using them. So does that mean it's more likely that things get hacked in a world without Mythos being available to cybersecurity defenders? Maybe. I think it's a little bit overheated. I think that there's a lot of defense in place already, but maybe there's some weight to that when people like Alex Stamos, who was then Facebook's head cybersecurity guy for years and years, comes in and says, hey, this is actually a problem. I'm inclined to listen.
- [18:19]
Zoe Schiffer
That's our show for today. We'll link to all the stories we spoke about in the show. Notes Uncanny Valley is produced by Kaleidoscope Content. Adriana Tapia produced this episode. It was fact checked by Daniel Roman Pram Bandy is our New York studio engineer Mark Caleda is our San Francisco studio engineer Kimberly Chua is our senior digital productions manager Kate Osborne is our executive producer and Katie Drummond is Wired's global Editorial director. Hi, I'm Stacey Vanek Smith. You might know me from public radio's Planet Money and Marketplace, and I'm here to tell you about a new show I'm working on at Bloomberg businessweek.
- [19:02]
Brian Barrett
Yeah, it's called Everybody's Business. I'm Max Chaffkin, a longtime reporter with Bloomberg Businessweek and more importantly, Stacy's co host.
- [19:11]
Zoe Schiffer
Each week we will talk to some of the smartest people we know to try and understand what is happening in the world of business and what it means for you.
- [19:19]
Brian Barrett
We'll explain Trump's trade war, the AI bubble, Elon Musk's whole thing, and lots of other stuff.
- [19:26]
Zoe Schiffer
Listen every week wherever you get your podcasts. From prx.