Chubby♨️@kimmonismus

2026-06-13 17:25·19天前

AI 摘要

2026年6月12日，美国国家安全部门发布出口指令，强制Anthropic切断所有外国国民对Fable 5和Mythos 5的访问，实际导致两个模型对所有用户禁用。Anthropic遵守命令但表示反对。这是政府首次因担心AI过于强大且可被越狱而直接干预模型发布。指令仅针对外国实体，意在防止强大模型（尤其是网络攻击能力）被用于挑战美国国家主权。此先例表明，当模型足够强大时，政府不会将安全交给私营公司；对欧洲而言，这意味着AI主权丧失和对美依赖加剧。

US government directive to suspend access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5. To explain in detail why this is a precedent. My personal assessment：

Firstly， because it's the first time a government has directly intervened in the release of a model. The reason given is that another company （the WSJ has identified it as Amazon） jailbroke Mythos 5/Fable 5， thereby ordering Anthropic to block access for everyone else. （According to Axios， the administration had previously tried unsuccessfully to prevent Anthropic from being released， and then resorted to the export letter， see screenshot）

However， the regulation clearly stipulates that it *only* affects foreign employees and foreign companies*. So， the clear and indirect message is： we， as the US government， do not want this （powerful， It's about offensive cyber capability mostly） model to be used by foreign entities， especially if they can circumvent the guardrails. Why？ Because （at least， that's my assumption） they don't want Mythos/Fable to be used as a tool against the dominance of their own national power.

But the significant point is actually the wake-up call that should now be clear to everyone. It was always clear， of course， and AI2027 warned against it： if models become too powerful， national governments will not entrust their security to private companies. This is that precedent. For China， this was certainly foreseeable； this moment was bound to come. For Europe， two things are becoming apparent：

1） They are not sovereign when it comes to AI. The most powerful models are dependent on the US， and they have no way to compete in the domestic European market.

2） They are even more compelled to maintain a good relationship with the US in order not to fall behind these models. The dependency is growing. I jokingly wrote that the EU should develop its own frontier models， but at best， the result would probably be a poor imitation of regulation， like "Claudia 5 Regulatory， SOTA in Regulations Benchmarks." Unfortunately， there is probably more truth to that.

Chubby♨️@kimmonismus · X

81导出 Markdown

2026-06-13 17:25·19天前

在 X 看原推· x.com

AI 摘要

US government directive to suspend access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5. To explain in detail why this is a precedent. My personal assessment：

Firstly， because it's the first time a government has directly intervened in the release of a model. The reason given is that another company （the WSJ has identified it as Amazon） jailbroke Mythos 5/Fable 5， thereby ordering Anthropic to block access for everyone else. （According to Axios， the administration had previously tried unsuccessfully to prevent Anthropic from being released， and then resorted to the export letter， see screenshot）

However， the regulation clearly stipulates that it *only* affects foreign employees and foreign companies*. So， the clear and indirect message is： we， as the US government， do not want this （powerful， It's about offensive cyber capability mostly） model to be used by foreign entities， especially if they can circumvent the guardrails. Why？ Because （at least， that's my assumption） they don't want Mythos/Fable to be used as a tool against the dominance of their own national power.