×
The Midjourney Scanner, it’s an ultrasound-based full-body scanner that uses a ring of sensors to capture vertical slices of the inside of your body, looking at the composition of your muscle, fat, bone, and organs to start. Holz said ideally, you could do this once a year or every single day, as it “aims for image quality comparable to MRI in many ways.”

He mentioned that one way he’d like to use it would be to see how his body changes in response to diet and workout changes, saying, “I’m not the most measured man on Earth yet, you know, but maybe I want to have that daily [measurable information]. A set of job listings advertises the company’s goal as trying to “build and launch the world’s first full-body ultrasound CT scanner, ultimately bringing safe, fast, and high fidelity preventative scanning to billions via a magical spa experience.”

The Midjourney Scanner was developed in a partnership with ultrasound tech company Butterfly Network, which said it uses “40 Butterfly Ultrasound-on-Chip™ imaging modules per system.”

The scanning process starts with stepping onto a platform that drops down into the water on rails through a ring of thousands of transducers that create ultrasonic waves and then record the ripples from them passing through your body to analyze them and create detailed 3D images, saying the scan will take about 60 seconds. Holz said about a dozen people have been scanned so far.

It starts by stepping into a shallow pool of golden light. You then begin to descend into the water. Your body passes through a ring of underwater sensors, each acting like a dolphin, using its echolocation. The sensors send ultrasonic sound waves through your body from every angle. With enough waves, and enough angles, we form an image of what’s happening inside your body.

It combines those sensors with two petaflops of processing power. But after watching the livestreamed reveal, I’m still unclear on what Midjourney’s AI image generation tech exactly has to do with the Midjourney Medical effort, beyond an alternative business for otherwise-unused AI compute.

Holz hopes to put 10 of the scanners into a Midjourney Spa location in San Francisco’s Union Square that will open before the end of 2027, and offered to scan the hands of attendees at its launch event. The Midjourney Spa will have a gym, saunas, and cold plunges to go along with the hot tub-equipped scanning rooms where visitors will get into the water to be scanned.

He did mention that various medical applications would require FDA clearances, but for now, Midjourney Medical says it’s working on “body composition maps” that don’t require the same level of clearance as diagnostic imaging. It also says the “library of scans” users create can be shared with doctors, AI health tools, or others, and that “We take data privacy seriously — more details on our data policies will come as we get closer to launch.”

Holz suggested that eventually these scans could become better than an MRI, without radiation, powerful magnets, or other complicating factors, to get a look at what’s going on inside people’s bodies “real fast.” In response to a question, he imagined a future where the FDA had a class of devices to look at “weird” things and allowed people to “just try to get as much data as we can.”

#Midjourney #generating #cat #images #fullbody #ultrasound #scansAI,Health,News,Science"> Midjourney goes from generating cat images to full-body ultrasound scansMidjourney CEO David Holz just showed off the company’s first hardware product and plans to build a San Francisco spa, which he admitted is a bit different from the “cat pictures” produced by its AI image generator. Dubbed The Midjourney Scanner, it’s an ultrasound-based full-body scanner that uses a ring of sensors to capture vertical slices of the inside of your body, looking at the composition of your muscle, fat, bone, and organs to start. Holz said ideally, you could do this once a year or every single day, as it “aims for image quality comparable to MRI in many ways.”He mentioned that one way he’d like to use it would be to see how his body changes in response to diet and workout changes, saying, “I’m not the most measured man on Earth yet, you know, but maybe I want to have that daily [measurable information]. A set of job listings advertises the company’s goal as trying to “build and launch the world’s first full-body ultrasound CT scanner, ultimately bringing safe, fast, and high fidelity preventative scanning to billions via a magical spa experience.”The Midjourney Scanner was developed in a partnership with ultrasound tech company Butterfly Network, which said it uses “40 Butterfly Ultrasound-on-Chip™ imaging modules per system.”The scanning process starts with stepping onto a platform that drops down into the water on rails through a ring of thousands of transducers that create ultrasonic waves and then record the ripples from them passing through your body to analyze them and create detailed 3D images, saying the scan will take about 60 seconds. Holz said about a dozen people have been scanned so far.It starts by stepping into a shallow pool of golden light. You then begin to descend into the water. Your body passes through a ring of underwater sensors, each acting like a dolphin, using its echolocation. The sensors send ultrasonic sound waves through your body from every angle. With enough waves, and enough angles, we form an image of what’s happening inside your body.It combines those sensors with two petaflops of processing power. But after watching the livestreamed reveal, I’m still unclear on what Midjourney’s AI image generation tech exactly has to do with the Midjourney Medical effort, beyond an alternative business for otherwise-unused AI compute.Holz hopes to put 10 of the scanners into a Midjourney Spa location in San Francisco’s Union Square that will open before the end of 2027, and offered to scan the hands of attendees at its launch event. The Midjourney Spa will have a gym, saunas, and cold plunges to go along with the hot tub-equipped scanning rooms where visitors will get into the water to be scanned.He did mention that various medical applications would require FDA clearances, but for now, Midjourney Medical says it’s working on “body composition maps” that don’t require the same level of clearance as diagnostic imaging. It also says the “library of scans” users create can be shared with doctors, AI health tools, or others, and that “We take data privacy seriously — more details on our data policies will come as we get closer to launch.”Holz suggested that eventually these scans could become better than an MRI, without radiation, powerful magnets, or other complicating factors, to get a look at what’s going on inside people’s bodies “real fast.” In response to a question, he imagined a future where the FDA had a class of devices to look at “weird” things and allowed people to “just try to get as much data as we can.”#Midjourney #generating #cat #images #fullbody #ultrasound #scansAI,Health,News,Science
Tech-news

The Midjourney Scanner, it’s an ultrasound-based full-body scanner that uses a ring of sensors to capture vertical slices of the inside of your body, looking at the composition of your muscle, fat, bone, and organs to start. Holz said ideally, you could do this once a year or every single day, as it “aims for image quality comparable to MRI in many ways.”

He mentioned that one way he’d like to use it would be to see how his body changes in response to diet and workout changes, saying, “I’m not the most measured man on Earth yet, you know, but maybe I want to have that daily [measurable information]. A set of job listings advertises the company’s goal as trying to “build and launch the world’s first full-body ultrasound CT scanner, ultimately bringing safe, fast, and high fidelity preventative scanning to billions via a magical spa experience.”

The Midjourney Scanner was developed in a partnership with ultrasound tech company Butterfly Network, which said it uses “40 Butterfly Ultrasound-on-Chip™ imaging modules per system.”

The scanning process starts with stepping onto a platform that drops down into the water on rails through a ring of thousands of transducers that create ultrasonic waves and then record the ripples from them passing through your body to analyze them and create detailed 3D images, saying the scan will take about 60 seconds. Holz said about a dozen people have been scanned so far.

It starts by stepping into a shallow pool of golden light. You then begin to descend into the water. Your body passes through a ring of underwater sensors, each acting like a dolphin, using its echolocation. The sensors send ultrasonic sound waves through your body from every angle. With enough waves, and enough angles, we form an image of what’s happening inside your body.

It combines those sensors with two petaflops of processing power. But after watching the livestreamed reveal, I’m still unclear on what Midjourney’s AI image generation tech exactly has to do with the Midjourney Medical effort, beyond an alternative business for otherwise-unused AI compute.

Holz hopes to put 10 of the scanners into a Midjourney Spa location in San Francisco’s Union Square that will open before the end of 2027, and offered to scan the hands of attendees at its launch event. The Midjourney Spa will have a gym, saunas, and cold plunges to go along with the hot tub-equipped scanning rooms where visitors will get into the water to be scanned.

He did mention that various medical applications would require FDA clearances, but for now, Midjourney Medical says it’s working on “body composition maps” that don’t require the same level of clearance as diagnostic imaging. It also says the “library of scans” users create can be shared with doctors, AI health tools, or others, and that “We take data privacy seriously — more details on our data policies will come as we get closer to launch.”

Holz suggested that eventually these scans could become better than an MRI, without radiation, powerful magnets, or other complicating factors, to get a look at what’s going on inside people’s bodies “real fast.” In response to a question, he imagined a future where the FDA had a class of devices to look at “weird” things and allowed people to “just try to get as much data as we can.”

#Midjourney #generating #cat #images #fullbody #ultrasound #scansAI,Health,News,Science">Midjourney goes from generating cat images to full-body ultrasound scans

Midjourney CEO David Holz just showed off the company’s first hardware product and plans to build a San Francisco spa, which he admitted is a bit different from the “cat pictures” produced by its AI image generator. Dubbed The Midjourney Scanner, it’s an ultrasound-based full-body scanner that uses a ring of sensors to capture vertical slices of the inside of your body, looking at the composition of your muscle, fat, bone, and organs to start. Holz said ideally, you could do this once a year or every single day, as it “aims for image quality comparable to MRI in many ways.”

He mentioned that one way he’d like to use it would be to see how his body changes in response to diet and workout changes, saying, “I’m not the most measured man on Earth yet, you know, but maybe I want to have that daily [measurable information]. A set of job listings advertises the company’s goal as trying to “build and launch the world’s first full-body ultrasound CT scanner, ultimately bringing safe, fast, and high fidelity preventative scanning to billions via a magical spa experience.”

The Midjourney Scanner was developed in a partnership with ultrasound tech company Butterfly Network, which said it uses “40 Butterfly Ultrasound-on-Chip™ imaging modules per system.”

The scanning process starts with stepping onto a platform that drops down into the water on rails through a ring of thousands of transducers that create ultrasonic waves and then record the ripples from them passing through your body to analyze them and create detailed 3D images, saying the scan will take about 60 seconds. Holz said about a dozen people have been scanned so far.

It starts by stepping into a shallow pool of golden light. You then begin to descend into the water. Your body passes through a ring of underwater sensors, each acting like a dolphin, using its echolocation. The sensors send ultrasonic sound waves through your body from every angle. With enough waves, and enough angles, we form an image of what’s happening inside your body.

It combines those sensors with two petaflops of processing power. But after watching the livestreamed reveal, I’m still unclear on what Midjourney’s AI image generation tech exactly has to do with the Midjourney Medical effort, beyond an alternative business for otherwise-unused AI compute.

Holz hopes to put 10 of the scanners into a Midjourney Spa location in San Francisco’s Union Square that will open before the end of 2027, and offered to scan the hands of attendees at its launch event. The Midjourney Spa will have a gym, saunas, and cold plunges to go along with the hot tub-equipped scanning rooms where visitors will get into the water to be scanned.

He did mention that various medical applications would require FDA clearances, but for now, Midjourney Medical says it’s working on “body composition maps” that don’t require the same level of clearance as diagnostic imaging. It also says the “library of scans” users create can be shared with doctors, AI health tools, or others, and that “We take data privacy seriously — more details on our data policies will come as we get closer to launch.”

Holz suggested that eventually these scans could become better than an MRI, without radiation, powerful magnets, or other complicating factors, to get a look at what’s going on inside people’s bodies “real fast.” In response to a question, he imagined a future where the FDA had a class of devices to look at “weird” things and allowed people to “just try to get as much data as we can.”

#Midjourney #generating #cat #images #fullbody #ultrasound #scansAI,Health,News,Science

Midjourney CEO David Holz just showed off the company’s first hardware product and plans to…

disable products it spent the past week hyping — and travel to Washington, DC in hopes of changing President Donald Trump’s mind. Now, over the coming days, the US government could dramatically alter the trajectory of the entire industry, dealing a major blow to American AI companies.

Claude Mythos 5 and Fable 5 are built on the same foundation as Anthropic’s Mythos Preview, which Anthropic dubbed too dangerous to publicly release. (The company’s warnings could be seen as genuine concern or more hype for their own model — or both.) Mythos 5 was made available to a select group of government agencies and companies, while Fable 5, which featured additional safeguards, was deemed “safe for general use.” But when a report indicated those guardrails may have failed, Anthropic’s dire warnings about Mythos falling into the wrong hands came back to haunt it.

A source familiar with the situation, who participated in the negotiations between Anthropic and the Trump administration, said the administration called the AI lab on Friday around 1pm ET and gave the company a 90-minute ultimatum to shut down access to Mythos 5 and Fable 5. If it didn’t, then the government would impose export controls on Anthropic by authority of the US Commerce Department.

The source said that Anthropic executives were talking to the White House within 15 minutes of that first call, confirming that CEO Dario Amodei joined the discussions about an hour and 15 minutes after that initial call. Amodei directly spoke with US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, and National Cyber Director Sean Cairncross, in some cases more than once, the source confirmed.

Anthropic wrote in a release on Friday that the company believed that the government “believes it has become aware of a method of bypassing, or ‘jailbreaking’ Fable 5.” Rather than an existential threat, though, Anthropic said that the jailbreak in question was a “potential narrow, non-universal” one that was “shared with the government” by an entity the company declined to name. Moreover, Anthropic said the behavior wasn’t unique to Fable 5. “We have reviewed a report that we believe is the basis of the government’s directive and validated that the level of capability displayed there is widely available from other models (including OpenAI’s GPT-5.5),” Anthropic wrote.

Semafor reported, citing one source familiar, that the hubbub began because the US government was concerned that a China-linked group had accessed the technology. But the source said that the China rumors went back weeks, referring to a large global telecommunications company that was initially cleared to be included in access to Mythos Preview, and that when the US government shared its concerns, Anthropic immediately revoked access.

An X post by David Sacks, the US government’s former AI and crypto czar who stepped down in March, didn’t mention China either. Sacks did, however, mention the unnamed entity that had exposed the issue to the government, calling it “a highly credible trusted partner of both Anthropic and the USG who was testing Fable [which] came forward with a jailbreak of those guardrails.”

Some reports point to Amazon CEO Andy Jassy as the person who flagged concerns to the US government after researchers at Amazon had red-teamed Fable 5. That conclusion stands at odds with some independent red-teamers, who have said they were impressed with the level of the protections.

The source familiar with the negotiations said that the Amazon research was explicitly mentioned in conversations with the US government. The person added that Anthropic had had access to that paper within days of the Friday export control directive and had been going back-and-forth since then with Amazon researchers to discuss it.

Everything in that paper, the source said, could be achieved by OpenAI’s GPT-5.5.

Anthropic spent the weekend scrambling to make nice with the Trump administration, beginning with virtual meetings and then flying employees to DC, including Dave Orr, Anthropic’s head of safeguards; Logan Graham, who runs its frontier red team and has led work on Project Glasswing; and Nicholas Carlini, a leading frontier developer and cybersecurity researcher. Axios reported, citing a source familiar with the Trump administration’s thinking, that the company simply has repeatedly made missteps in its communication with the administration and that it “has not done a great job at trying to speak to the administration and appreciate the ideological differences.” For Anthropic, the timing couldn’t be worse: the company had banked on Mythos to help it recover, in part, from months of high-profile clashes with the US Department of Defense.

The source familiar with the negotiations said that Anthropic pre-briefed the administration on Fable 5, and that the US Department of Commerce conducted testing pre-deployment, with no concerns shared at the time. The source added that Anthropic had been working closely with government agencies since Mythos Preview’s release.

The Trump administration initially took a hands-off approach to AI safety — but post-Mythos, it has become more ambivalent, even as it frets over the threat of losing the AI race to China. Now, prominent cybersecurity leaders have warned that sidelining Mythos 5 and Fable 5 could give China a significant AI advantage. Trump’s move has galvanized international calls for alternatives to American AI systems, while effectively putting a major US AI company’s new flagship model on ice.

A public letter from tech and cybersecurity executives called for restrictions on Fable 5 to be repealed on Sunday. “Not all of us agree that AI regulation is the right way forward,” the letter states, adding that if regulations are going to happen regardless, then they should be rooted in “scientific evaluations developed with input from industry and academia.”

Alex Stamos, chief product officer at Corridor, told The Verge he organized the public letter because the countless number of vulnerabilities in the past decade-plus, written in a variety of different coding languages, require AI to patch before bad actors find them. “We’re in a race, and I think policymakers don’t understand that,” Stamos said. “There’s this weird arrogance, this idea that American labs are hugely ahead of our adversaries that will always be true, that it’s really important to restrict access because of that. I just think that’s foolish. If the labs are ahead, it’s only by a matter of months. And you can see that in the open evaluations. The cutting-edge models are only something like six months ahead of the Chinese models — and those are the models we know about.”

The public letter goes on to state that though Anthropic’s Mythos-class models are skilled at finding cybersecurity vulnerabilities and taking advantage of exploits, they aren’t “uniquely good” at these tasks and that Fable 5’s safeguards “were so aggressive as to be the source of humor in the cyber community on launch day.” Stamos told The Verge that “there’s a real overstatement of Mythos’ capabilities. Anthropic is somewhat responsible for this themselves, clearly … Mythos is great, but the real turning point was really last year.”

Stamos said the industry is awash with backup contracts being signed with non-US companies and open-weight models being deployed on alternative hardware arrangements because the past weekend made political risk part of companies’ business plans more than ever before.

“They are laughing at us in Beijing right now,” Stamos said. “One of America’s champions is being kneecapped by the US government while we’re in a race with the Chinese. It’s just incredibly stupid. That’s why I wrote the letter, and I think that’s why a lot of people signed onto it.”

Ben Van Roo, co-founder and CEO of Legion Intelligence, a system of agents for the national security community, told The Verge that “the directive of ‘no foreign national should use this model’ is the most impossible thing to enforce.” He added, “When I first read that, my whole… [network of] AI community nerds was exploding.”

To make matters even more urgent, OpenAI, Google, and Microsoft have all come out with their own comparable products to Anthropic’s Mythos, making many of the same claims about their effectiveness and risks. If the Trump administration bans Anthropic’s advanced cybersecurity models, it can make a case for banning its competitors’ models, too. That could spur AI industry leaders to unite and help out Anthropic or, as with its fight over autonomous weapons with the Pentagon, position themselves as a safer and more compliant alternative.

Even as the Trump administration is trying to free tech companies of regulatory hassles, the Anthropic order could amount to a dramatic restriction on powerful AI models — depending on how the next few days play out.

Legion Intelligence’s Van Roo called it “uncharted territory” in the regulatory setting, adding that he doesn’t think this is the last time something like this will happen.

We’ve also entered the era of AI populism, when a growing number of people are pushing back against the AI industry’s outsized influence and the concentration of power at the top via data center protests, pledges to quit using AI chatbots, lawsuits over wrongful deaths, and even attempted attacks on AI company CEOs. Van Roo says the Trump administration’s recent moves against Anthropic could stoke “greater fears and concerns, potentially for the wrong reasons.”

The source familiar with the negotiations described the weekend’s conversations as constructive, with some members of the administration admitting that putting export controls on model providers isn’t ideal, since competitors with similar products may find themselves under the same restrictions — and since the US government is currently exploring a program that would encourage the export of American AI systems.

Monday’s talks concluded with no resolution as of yet.

As Anthropic continues to negotiate with the US government, there’s little chance that the company’s other myriad issues with the Pentagon won’t come up — namely, the ongoing battle between Anthropic and the Department of Defense over acceptable usage policies for Anthropic’s tech by the US military.

“This is new and we’ve never had anything potentially this drastic before, and it does have some real ramifications” in terms of how to enforce access to powerful models, Van Roo said. “Who gets to use this new technology that continues to outpace our own ability to regulate it?”

Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.
#fight #Claude #MythosAI,Anthropic,Policy,Report"> Inside the fight over Claude Mythos 5As the rest of the country celebrated the USA’s first World Cup win and the New York Knicks championship, Anthropic spent its weekend fighting the Trump administration over its latest model release. At 5:21 PM on Friday, the company received a US export control directive to suspend access to its Mythos 5 and Fable 5 AI models by “any foreign national” inside or outside the US, “including foreign national Anthropic employees.” The only way that was possible, Anthropic determined, was to completely disable products it spent the past week hyping — and travel to Washington, DC in hopes of changing President Donald Trump’s mind. Now, over the coming days, the US government could dramatically alter the trajectory of the entire industry, dealing a major blow to American AI companies.Claude Mythos 5 and Fable 5 are built on the same foundation as Anthropic’s Mythos Preview, which Anthropic dubbed too dangerous to publicly release. (The company’s warnings could be seen as genuine concern or more hype for their own model — or both.) Mythos 5 was made available to a select group of government agencies and companies, while Fable 5, which featured additional safeguards, was deemed “safe for general use.” But when a report indicated those guardrails may have failed, Anthropic’s dire warnings about Mythos falling into the wrong hands came back to haunt it.A source familiar with the situation, who participated in the negotiations between Anthropic and the Trump administration, said the administration called the AI lab on Friday around 1pm ET and gave the company a 90-minute ultimatum to shut down access to Mythos 5 and Fable 5. If it didn’t, then the government would impose export controls on Anthropic by authority of the US Commerce Department.The source said that Anthropic executives were talking to the White House within 15 minutes of that first call, confirming that CEO Dario Amodei joined the discussions about an hour and 15 minutes after that initial call. Amodei directly spoke with US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, and National Cyber Director Sean Cairncross, in some cases more than once, the source confirmed.Anthropic wrote in a release on Friday that the company believed that the government “believes it has become aware of a method of bypassing, or ‘jailbreaking’ Fable 5.” Rather than an existential threat, though, Anthropic said that the jailbreak in question was a “potential narrow, non-universal” one that was “shared with the government” by an entity the company declined to name. Moreover, Anthropic said the behavior wasn’t unique to Fable 5. “We have reviewed a report that we believe is the basis of the government’s directive and validated that the level of capability displayed there is widely available from other models (including OpenAI’s GPT-5.5),” Anthropic wrote.Semafor reported, citing one source familiar, that the hubbub began because the US government was concerned that a China-linked group had accessed the technology. But the source said that the China rumors went back weeks, referring to a large global telecommunications company that was initially cleared to be included in access to Mythos Preview, and that when the US government shared its concerns, Anthropic immediately revoked access.An X post by David Sacks, the US government’s former AI and crypto czar who stepped down in March, didn’t mention China either. Sacks did, however, mention the unnamed entity that had exposed the issue to the government, calling it “a highly credible trusted partner of both Anthropic and the USG who was testing Fable [which] came forward with a jailbreak of those guardrails.”Some reports point to Amazon CEO Andy Jassy as the person who flagged concerns to the US government after researchers at Amazon had red-teamed Fable 5. That conclusion stands at odds with some independent red-teamers, who have said they were impressed with the level of the protections.The source familiar with the negotiations said that the Amazon research was explicitly mentioned in conversations with the US government. The person added that Anthropic had had access to that paper within days of the Friday export control directive and had been going back-and-forth since then with Amazon researchers to discuss it.Everything in that paper, the source said, could be achieved by OpenAI’s GPT-5.5.Anthropic spent the weekend scrambling to make nice with the Trump administration, beginning with virtual meetings and then flying employees to DC, including Dave Orr, Anthropic’s head of safeguards; Logan Graham, who runs its frontier red team and has led work on Project Glasswing; and Nicholas Carlini, a leading frontier developer and cybersecurity researcher. Axios reported, citing a source familiar with the Trump administration’s thinking, that the company simply has repeatedly made missteps in its communication with the administration and that it “has not done a great job at trying to speak to the administration and appreciate the ideological differences.” For Anthropic, the timing couldn’t be worse: the company had banked on Mythos to help it recover, in part, from months of high-profile clashes with the US Department of Defense.The source familiar with the negotiations said that Anthropic pre-briefed the administration on Fable 5, and that the US Department of Commerce conducted testing pre-deployment, with no concerns shared at the time. The source added that Anthropic had been working closely with government agencies since Mythos Preview’s release.The Trump administration initially took a hands-off approach to AI safety — but post-Mythos, it has become more ambivalent, even as it frets over the threat of losing the AI race to China. Now, prominent cybersecurity leaders have warned that sidelining Mythos 5 and Fable 5 could give China a significant AI advantage. Trump’s move has galvanized international calls for alternatives to American AI systems, while effectively putting a major US AI company’s new flagship model on ice.A public letter from tech and cybersecurity executives called for restrictions on Fable 5 to be repealed on Sunday. “Not all of us agree that AI regulation is the right way forward,” the letter states, adding that if regulations are going to happen regardless, then they should be rooted in “scientific evaluations developed with input from industry and academia.”Alex Stamos, chief product officer at Corridor, told The Verge he organized the public letter because the countless number of vulnerabilities in the past decade-plus, written in a variety of different coding languages, require AI to patch before bad actors find them. “We’re in a race, and I think policymakers don’t understand that,” Stamos said. “There’s this weird arrogance, this idea that American labs are hugely ahead of our adversaries that will always be true, that it’s really important to restrict access because of that. I just think that’s foolish. If the labs are ahead, it’s only by a matter of months. And you can see that in the open evaluations. The cutting-edge models are only something like six months ahead of the Chinese models — and those are the models we know about.”The public letter goes on to state that though Anthropic’s Mythos-class models are skilled at finding cybersecurity vulnerabilities and taking advantage of exploits, they aren’t “uniquely good” at these tasks and that Fable 5’s safeguards “were so aggressive as to be the source of humor in the cyber community on launch day.” Stamos told The Verge that “there’s a real overstatement of Mythos’ capabilities. Anthropic is somewhat responsible for this themselves, clearly … Mythos is great, but the real turning point was really last year.”Stamos said the industry is awash with backup contracts being signed with non-US companies and open-weight models being deployed on alternative hardware arrangements because the past weekend made political risk part of companies’ business plans more than ever before.“They are laughing at us in Beijing right now,” Stamos said. “One of America’s champions is being kneecapped by the US government while we’re in a race with the Chinese. It’s just incredibly stupid. That’s why I wrote the letter, and I think that’s why a lot of people signed onto it.”Ben Van Roo, co-founder and CEO of Legion Intelligence, a system of agents for the national security community, told The Verge that “the directive of ‘no foreign national should use this model’ is the most impossible thing to enforce.” He added, “When I first read that, my whole… [network of] AI community nerds was exploding.”To make matters even more urgent, OpenAI, Google, and Microsoft have all come out with their own comparable products to Anthropic’s Mythos, making many of the same claims about their effectiveness and risks. If the Trump administration bans Anthropic’s advanced cybersecurity models, it can make a case for banning its competitors’ models, too. That could spur AI industry leaders to unite and help out Anthropic or, as with its fight over autonomous weapons with the Pentagon, position themselves as a safer and more compliant alternative.Even as the Trump administration is trying to free tech companies of regulatory hassles, the Anthropic order could amount to a dramatic restriction on powerful AI models — depending on how the next few days play out.Legion Intelligence’s Van Roo called it “uncharted territory” in the regulatory setting, adding that he doesn’t think this is the last time something like this will happen.We’ve also entered the era of AI populism, when a growing number of people are pushing back against the AI industry’s outsized influence and the concentration of power at the top via data center protests, pledges to quit using AI chatbots, lawsuits over wrongful deaths, and even attempted attacks on AI company CEOs. Van Roo says the Trump administration’s recent moves against Anthropic could stoke “greater fears and concerns, potentially for the wrong reasons.”The source familiar with the negotiations described the weekend’s conversations as constructive, with some members of the administration admitting that putting export controls on model providers isn’t ideal, since competitors with similar products may find themselves under the same restrictions — and since the US government is currently exploring a program that would encourage the export of American AI systems.Monday’s talks concluded with no resolution as of yet.As Anthropic continues to negotiate with the US government, there’s little chance that the company’s other myriad issues with the Pentagon won’t come up — namely, the ongoing battle between Anthropic and the Department of Defense over acceptable usage policies for Anthropic’s tech by the US military.“This is new and we’ve never had anything potentially this drastic before, and it does have some real ramifications” in terms of how to enforce access to powerful models, Van Roo said. “Who gets to use this new technology that continues to outpace our own ability to regulate it?”Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.Hayden FieldCloseHayden FieldPosts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All by Hayden FieldAICloseAIPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All AIAnthropicCloseAnthropicPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All AnthropicPolicyClosePolicyPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All PolicyReportCloseReportPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All Report#fight #Claude #MythosAI,Anthropic,Policy,Report
Tech-news

disable products it spent the past week hyping — and travel to Washington, DC in hopes of changing President Donald Trump’s mind. Now, over the coming days, the US government could dramatically alter the trajectory of the entire industry, dealing a major blow to American AI companies.

Claude Mythos 5 and Fable 5 are built on the same foundation as Anthropic’s Mythos Preview, which Anthropic dubbed too dangerous to publicly release. (The company’s warnings could be seen as genuine concern or more hype for their own model — or both.) Mythos 5 was made available to a select group of government agencies and companies, while Fable 5, which featured additional safeguards, was deemed “safe for general use.” But when a report indicated those guardrails may have failed, Anthropic’s dire warnings about Mythos falling into the wrong hands came back to haunt it.

A source familiar with the situation, who participated in the negotiations between Anthropic and the Trump administration, said the administration called the AI lab on Friday around 1pm ET and gave the company a 90-minute ultimatum to shut down access to Mythos 5 and Fable 5. If it didn’t, then the government would impose export controls on Anthropic by authority of the US Commerce Department.

The source said that Anthropic executives were talking to the White House within 15 minutes of that first call, confirming that CEO Dario Amodei joined the discussions about an hour and 15 minutes after that initial call. Amodei directly spoke with US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, and National Cyber Director Sean Cairncross, in some cases more than once, the source confirmed.

Anthropic wrote in a release on Friday that the company believed that the government “believes it has become aware of a method of bypassing, or ‘jailbreaking’ Fable 5.” Rather than an existential threat, though, Anthropic said that the jailbreak in question was a “potential narrow, non-universal” one that was “shared with the government” by an entity the company declined to name. Moreover, Anthropic said the behavior wasn’t unique to Fable 5. “We have reviewed a report that we believe is the basis of the government’s directive and validated that the level of capability displayed there is widely available from other models (including OpenAI’s GPT-5.5),” Anthropic wrote.

Semafor reported, citing one source familiar, that the hubbub began because the US government was concerned that a China-linked group had accessed the technology. But the source said that the China rumors went back weeks, referring to a large global telecommunications company that was initially cleared to be included in access to Mythos Preview, and that when the US government shared its concerns, Anthropic immediately revoked access.

An X post by David Sacks, the US government’s former AI and crypto czar who stepped down in March, didn’t mention China either. Sacks did, however, mention the unnamed entity that had exposed the issue to the government, calling it “a highly credible trusted partner of both Anthropic and the USG who was testing Fable [which] came forward with a jailbreak of those guardrails.”

Some reports point to Amazon CEO Andy Jassy as the person who flagged concerns to the US government after researchers at Amazon had red-teamed Fable 5. That conclusion stands at odds with some independent red-teamers, who have said they were impressed with the level of the protections.

The source familiar with the negotiations said that the Amazon research was explicitly mentioned in conversations with the US government. The person added that Anthropic had had access to that paper within days of the Friday export control directive and had been going back-and-forth since then with Amazon researchers to discuss it.

Everything in that paper, the source said, could be achieved by OpenAI’s GPT-5.5.

Anthropic spent the weekend scrambling to make nice with the Trump administration, beginning with virtual meetings and then flying employees to DC, including Dave Orr, Anthropic’s head of safeguards; Logan Graham, who runs its frontier red team and has led work on Project Glasswing; and Nicholas Carlini, a leading frontier developer and cybersecurity researcher. Axios reported, citing a source familiar with the Trump administration’s thinking, that the company simply has repeatedly made missteps in its communication with the administration and that it “has not done a great job at trying to speak to the administration and appreciate the ideological differences.” For Anthropic, the timing couldn’t be worse: the company had banked on Mythos to help it recover, in part, from months of high-profile clashes with the US Department of Defense.

The source familiar with the negotiations said that Anthropic pre-briefed the administration on Fable 5, and that the US Department of Commerce conducted testing pre-deployment, with no concerns shared at the time. The source added that Anthropic had been working closely with government agencies since Mythos Preview’s release.

The Trump administration initially took a hands-off approach to AI safety — but post-Mythos, it has become more ambivalent, even as it frets over the threat of losing the AI race to China. Now, prominent cybersecurity leaders have warned that sidelining Mythos 5 and Fable 5 could give China a significant AI advantage. Trump’s move has galvanized international calls for alternatives to American AI systems, while effectively putting a major US AI company’s new flagship model on ice.

A public letter from tech and cybersecurity executives called for restrictions on Fable 5 to be repealed on Sunday. “Not all of us agree that AI regulation is the right way forward,” the letter states, adding that if regulations are going to happen regardless, then they should be rooted in “scientific evaluations developed with input from industry and academia.”

Alex Stamos, chief product officer at Corridor, told The Verge he organized the public letter because the countless number of vulnerabilities in the past decade-plus, written in a variety of different coding languages, require AI to patch before bad actors find them. “We’re in a race, and I think policymakers don’t understand that,” Stamos said. “There’s this weird arrogance, this idea that American labs are hugely ahead of our adversaries that will always be true, that it’s really important to restrict access because of that. I just think that’s foolish. If the labs are ahead, it’s only by a matter of months. And you can see that in the open evaluations. The cutting-edge models are only something like six months ahead of the Chinese models — and those are the models we know about.”

The public letter goes on to state that though Anthropic’s Mythos-class models are skilled at finding cybersecurity vulnerabilities and taking advantage of exploits, they aren’t “uniquely good” at these tasks and that Fable 5’s safeguards “were so aggressive as to be the source of humor in the cyber community on launch day.” Stamos told The Verge that “there’s a real overstatement of Mythos’ capabilities. Anthropic is somewhat responsible for this themselves, clearly … Mythos is great, but the real turning point was really last year.”

Stamos said the industry is awash with backup contracts being signed with non-US companies and open-weight models being deployed on alternative hardware arrangements because the past weekend made political risk part of companies’ business plans more than ever before.

“They are laughing at us in Beijing right now,” Stamos said. “One of America’s champions is being kneecapped by the US government while we’re in a race with the Chinese. It’s just incredibly stupid. That’s why I wrote the letter, and I think that’s why a lot of people signed onto it.”

Ben Van Roo, co-founder and CEO of Legion Intelligence, a system of agents for the national security community, told The Verge that “the directive of ‘no foreign national should use this model’ is the most impossible thing to enforce.” He added, “When I first read that, my whole… [network of] AI community nerds was exploding.”

To make matters even more urgent, OpenAI, Google, and Microsoft have all come out with their own comparable products to Anthropic’s Mythos, making many of the same claims about their effectiveness and risks. If the Trump administration bans Anthropic’s advanced cybersecurity models, it can make a case for banning its competitors’ models, too. That could spur AI industry leaders to unite and help out Anthropic or, as with its fight over autonomous weapons with the Pentagon, position themselves as a safer and more compliant alternative.

Even as the Trump administration is trying to free tech companies of regulatory hassles, the Anthropic order could amount to a dramatic restriction on powerful AI models — depending on how the next few days play out.

Legion Intelligence’s Van Roo called it “uncharted territory” in the regulatory setting, adding that he doesn’t think this is the last time something like this will happen.

We’ve also entered the era of AI populism, when a growing number of people are pushing back against the AI industry’s outsized influence and the concentration of power at the top via data center protests, pledges to quit using AI chatbots, lawsuits over wrongful deaths, and even attempted attacks on AI company CEOs. Van Roo says the Trump administration’s recent moves against Anthropic could stoke “greater fears and concerns, potentially for the wrong reasons.”

The source familiar with the negotiations described the weekend’s conversations as constructive, with some members of the administration admitting that putting export controls on model providers isn’t ideal, since competitors with similar products may find themselves under the same restrictions — and since the US government is currently exploring a program that would encourage the export of American AI systems.

Monday’s talks concluded with no resolution as of yet.

As Anthropic continues to negotiate with the US government, there’s little chance that the company’s other myriad issues with the Pentagon won’t come up — namely, the ongoing battle between Anthropic and the Department of Defense over acceptable usage policies for Anthropic’s tech by the US military.

“This is new and we’ve never had anything potentially this drastic before, and it does have some real ramifications” in terms of how to enforce access to powerful models, Van Roo said. “Who gets to use this new technology that continues to outpace our own ability to regulate it?”

Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.

#fight #Claude #MythosAI,Anthropic,Policy,Report">Inside the fight over Claude Mythos 5

As the rest of the country celebrated the USA’s first World Cup win and the New York Knicks championship, Anthropic spent its weekend fighting the Trump administration over its latest model release. At 5:21 PM on Friday, the company received a US export control directive to suspend access to its Mythos 5 and Fable 5 AI models by “any foreign national” inside or outside the US, “including foreign national Anthropic employees.” The only way that was possible, Anthropic determined, was to completely disable products it spent the past week hyping — and travel to Washington, DC in hopes of changing President Donald Trump’s mind. Now, over the coming days, the US government could dramatically alter the trajectory of the entire industry, dealing a major blow to American AI companies.

Claude Mythos 5 and Fable 5 are built on the same foundation as Anthropic’s Mythos Preview, which Anthropic dubbed too dangerous to publicly release. (The company’s warnings could be seen as genuine concern or more hype for their own model — or both.) Mythos 5 was made available to a select group of government agencies and companies, while Fable 5, which featured additional safeguards, was deemed “safe for general use.” But when a report indicated those guardrails may have failed, Anthropic’s dire warnings about Mythos falling into the wrong hands came back to haunt it.

A source familiar with the situation, who participated in the negotiations between Anthropic and the Trump administration, said the administration called the AI lab on Friday around 1pm ET and gave the company a 90-minute ultimatum to shut down access to Mythos 5 and Fable 5. If it didn’t, then the government would impose export controls on Anthropic by authority of the US Commerce Department.

The source said that Anthropic executives were talking to the White House within 15 minutes of that first call, confirming that CEO Dario Amodei joined the discussions about an hour and 15 minutes after that initial call. Amodei directly spoke with US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, and National Cyber Director Sean Cairncross, in some cases more than once, the source confirmed.

Anthropic wrote in a release on Friday that the company believed that the government “believes it has become aware of a method of bypassing, or ‘jailbreaking’ Fable 5.” Rather than an existential threat, though, Anthropic said that the jailbreak in question was a “potential narrow, non-universal” one that was “shared with the government” by an entity the company declined to name. Moreover, Anthropic said the behavior wasn’t unique to Fable 5. “We have reviewed a report that we believe is the basis of the government’s directive and validated that the level of capability displayed there is widely available from other models (including OpenAI’s GPT-5.5),” Anthropic wrote.

Semafor reported, citing one source familiar, that the hubbub began because the US government was concerned that a China-linked group had accessed the technology. But the source said that the China rumors went back weeks, referring to a large global telecommunications company that was initially cleared to be included in access to Mythos Preview, and that when the US government shared its concerns, Anthropic immediately revoked access.

An X post by David Sacks, the US government’s former AI and crypto czar who stepped down in March, didn’t mention China either. Sacks did, however, mention the unnamed entity that had exposed the issue to the government, calling it “a highly credible trusted partner of both Anthropic and the USG who was testing Fable [which] came forward with a jailbreak of those guardrails.”

Some reports point to Amazon CEO Andy Jassy as the person who flagged concerns to the US government after researchers at Amazon had red-teamed Fable 5. That conclusion stands at odds with some independent red-teamers, who have said they were impressed with the level of the protections.

The source familiar with the negotiations said that the Amazon research was explicitly mentioned in conversations with the US government. The person added that Anthropic had had access to that paper within days of the Friday export control directive and had been going back-and-forth since then with Amazon researchers to discuss it.

Everything in that paper, the source said, could be achieved by OpenAI’s GPT-5.5.

Anthropic spent the weekend scrambling to make nice with the Trump administration, beginning with virtual meetings and then flying employees to DC, including Dave Orr, Anthropic’s head of safeguards; Logan Graham, who runs its frontier red team and has led work on Project Glasswing; and Nicholas Carlini, a leading frontier developer and cybersecurity researcher. Axios reported, citing a source familiar with the Trump administration’s thinking, that the company simply has repeatedly made missteps in its communication with the administration and that it “has not done a great job at trying to speak to the administration and appreciate the ideological differences.” For Anthropic, the timing couldn’t be worse: the company had banked on Mythos to help it recover, in part, from months of high-profile clashes with the US Department of Defense.

The source familiar with the negotiations said that Anthropic pre-briefed the administration on Fable 5, and that the US Department of Commerce conducted testing pre-deployment, with no concerns shared at the time. The source added that Anthropic had been working closely with government agencies since Mythos Preview’s release.

The Trump administration initially took a hands-off approach to AI safety — but post-Mythos, it has become more ambivalent, even as it frets over the threat of losing the AI race to China. Now, prominent cybersecurity leaders have warned that sidelining Mythos 5 and Fable 5 could give China a significant AI advantage. Trump’s move has galvanized international calls for alternatives to American AI systems, while effectively putting a major US AI company’s new flagship model on ice.

A public letter from tech and cybersecurity executives called for restrictions on Fable 5 to be repealed on Sunday. “Not all of us agree that AI regulation is the right way forward,” the letter states, adding that if regulations are going to happen regardless, then they should be rooted in “scientific evaluations developed with input from industry and academia.”

Alex Stamos, chief product officer at Corridor, told The Verge he organized the public letter because the countless number of vulnerabilities in the past decade-plus, written in a variety of different coding languages, require AI to patch before bad actors find them. “We’re in a race, and I think policymakers don’t understand that,” Stamos said. “There’s this weird arrogance, this idea that American labs are hugely ahead of our adversaries that will always be true, that it’s really important to restrict access because of that. I just think that’s foolish. If the labs are ahead, it’s only by a matter of months. And you can see that in the open evaluations. The cutting-edge models are only something like six months ahead of the Chinese models — and those are the models we know about.”

The public letter goes on to state that though Anthropic’s Mythos-class models are skilled at finding cybersecurity vulnerabilities and taking advantage of exploits, they aren’t “uniquely good” at these tasks and that Fable 5’s safeguards “were so aggressive as to be the source of humor in the cyber community on launch day.” Stamos told The Verge that “there’s a real overstatement of Mythos’ capabilities. Anthropic is somewhat responsible for this themselves, clearly … Mythos is great, but the real turning point was really last year.”

Stamos said the industry is awash with backup contracts being signed with non-US companies and open-weight models being deployed on alternative hardware arrangements because the past weekend made political risk part of companies’ business plans more than ever before.

“They are laughing at us in Beijing right now,” Stamos said. “One of America’s champions is being kneecapped by the US government while we’re in a race with the Chinese. It’s just incredibly stupid. That’s why I wrote the letter, and I think that’s why a lot of people signed onto it.”

Ben Van Roo, co-founder and CEO of Legion Intelligence, a system of agents for the national security community, told The Verge that “the directive of ‘no foreign national should use this model’ is the most impossible thing to enforce.” He added, “When I first read that, my whole… [network of] AI community nerds was exploding.”

To make matters even more urgent, OpenAI, Google, and Microsoft have all come out with their own comparable products to Anthropic’s Mythos, making many of the same claims about their effectiveness and risks. If the Trump administration bans Anthropic’s advanced cybersecurity models, it can make a case for banning its competitors’ models, too. That could spur AI industry leaders to unite and help out Anthropic or, as with its fight over autonomous weapons with the Pentagon, position themselves as a safer and more compliant alternative.

Even as the Trump administration is trying to free tech companies of regulatory hassles, the Anthropic order could amount to a dramatic restriction on powerful AI models — depending on how the next few days play out.

Legion Intelligence’s Van Roo called it “uncharted territory” in the regulatory setting, adding that he doesn’t think this is the last time something like this will happen.

We’ve also entered the era of AI populism, when a growing number of people are pushing back against the AI industry’s outsized influence and the concentration of power at the top via data center protests, pledges to quit using AI chatbots, lawsuits over wrongful deaths, and even attempted attacks on AI company CEOs. Van Roo says the Trump administration’s recent moves against Anthropic could stoke “greater fears and concerns, potentially for the wrong reasons.”

The source familiar with the negotiations described the weekend’s conversations as constructive, with some members of the administration admitting that putting export controls on model providers isn’t ideal, since competitors with similar products may find themselves under the same restrictions — and since the US government is currently exploring a program that would encourage the export of American AI systems.

Monday’s talks concluded with no resolution as of yet.

As Anthropic continues to negotiate with the US government, there’s little chance that the company’s other myriad issues with the Pentagon won’t come up — namely, the ongoing battle between Anthropic and the Department of Defense over acceptable usage policies for Anthropic’s tech by the US military.

“This is new and we’ve never had anything potentially this drastic before, and it does have some real ramifications” in terms of how to enforce access to powerful models, Van Roo said. “Who gets to use this new technology that continues to outpace our own ability to regulate it?”

Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.
#fight #Claude #MythosAI,Anthropic,Policy,Report

As the rest of the country celebrated the USA’s first World Cup win and the…

Wall Street Journal, the export control directive that led to Anthropic cutting off access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5 was triggered in part by cybersecurity research from Amazon and conversations between CEO Andy Jassy and the White House. According to the report, the paper from Amazon claims that, through a series of prompts, it was able to get Fable 5 to serve up information that could be used in cyberattacks. Amazon has yet to respond to a request for comment.

Shortly after Jassy shared the company’s findings with the government, it made the call to block its use by foreign nationals. Complicating this issue is that many of Anthropic’s researchers are foreign-born, meaning they were barred from accessing their own product.

In a statement, Anthropic disputed the government’s characterization of the issue as a “jailbreak.” It argued that many of the same vulnerabilities could be discovered using other publicly available models, including GPT 5.5. Some security researchers appear to back the company’s interpretation. Katie Moussouris, the founder and CEO of LutaSecurity posted on BlueSky that “I’ve seen the paper. It’s not a jailbreak.” Former Commerce Department official Kate Koren speculated to the WSJ that the White House’s dislike of Anthropic may have influenced the decision.

Anthropic and the Trump administration have been at odds for some time over the company’s refusal to allow its AI to be used for mass surveillance of Americans or to power lethal autonomous weapons. In February, Trump instructed federal agencies to stop using Anthropic’s AI. And just hours later, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth designated the company a supply chain risk.

The government and the company seemed to have made amends, and the two had worked together to expand access to Mythos. However, now the two seem destined to clash again.

#Amazon #security #research #reportedly #led #White #Houses #Anthropic #Fable #banAI,Amazon,Anthropic,News,Policy,Politics,Security,Tech"> Amazon security research reportedly led to the White House’s Anthropic Fable banAccording to the Wall Street Journal, the export control directive that led to Anthropic cutting off access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5 was triggered in part by cybersecurity research from Amazon and conversations between CEO Andy Jassy and the White House. According to the report, the paper from Amazon claims that, through a series of prompts, it was able to get Fable 5 to serve up information that could be used in cyberattacks. Amazon has yet to respond to a request for comment.Shortly after Jassy shared the company’s findings with the government, it made the call to block its use by foreign nationals. Complicating this issue is that many of Anthropic’s researchers are foreign-born, meaning they were barred from accessing their own product.In a statement, Anthropic disputed the government’s characterization of the issue as a “jailbreak.” It argued that many of the same vulnerabilities could be discovered using other publicly available models, including GPT 5.5. Some security researchers appear to back the company’s interpretation. Katie Moussouris, the founder and CEO of LutaSecurity posted on BlueSky that “I’ve seen the paper. It’s not a jailbreak.” Former Commerce Department official Kate Koren speculated to the WSJ that the White House’s dislike of Anthropic may have influenced the decision.Anthropic and the Trump administration have been at odds for some time over the company’s refusal to allow its AI to be used for mass surveillance of Americans or to power lethal autonomous weapons. In February, Trump instructed federal agencies to stop using Anthropic’s AI. And just hours later, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth designated the company a supply chain risk.The government and the company seemed to have made amends, and the two had worked together to expand access to Mythos. However, now the two seem destined to clash again.#Amazon #security #research #reportedly #led #White #Houses #Anthropic #Fable #banAI,Amazon,Anthropic,News,Policy,Politics,Security,Tech
Tech-news

Wall Street Journal, the export control directive that led to Anthropic cutting off access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5 was triggered in part by cybersecurity research from Amazon and conversations between CEO Andy Jassy and the White House. According to the report, the paper from Amazon claims that, through a series of prompts, it was able to get Fable 5 to serve up information that could be used in cyberattacks. Amazon has yet to respond to a request for comment.

Shortly after Jassy shared the company’s findings with the government, it made the call to block its use by foreign nationals. Complicating this issue is that many of Anthropic’s researchers are foreign-born, meaning they were barred from accessing their own product.

In a statement, Anthropic disputed the government’s characterization of the issue as a “jailbreak.” It argued that many of the same vulnerabilities could be discovered using other publicly available models, including GPT 5.5. Some security researchers appear to back the company’s interpretation. Katie Moussouris, the founder and CEO of LutaSecurity posted on BlueSky that “I’ve seen the paper. It’s not a jailbreak.” Former Commerce Department official Kate Koren speculated to the WSJ that the White House’s dislike of Anthropic may have influenced the decision.

Anthropic and the Trump administration have been at odds for some time over the company’s refusal to allow its AI to be used for mass surveillance of Americans or to power lethal autonomous weapons. In February, Trump instructed federal agencies to stop using Anthropic’s AI. And just hours later, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth designated the company a supply chain risk.

The government and the company seemed to have made amends, and the two had worked together to expand access to Mythos. However, now the two seem destined to clash again.

#Amazon #security #research #reportedly #led #White #Houses #Anthropic #Fable #banAI,Amazon,Anthropic,News,Policy,Politics,Security,Tech">Amazon security research reportedly led to the White House’s Anthropic Fable ban

According to the Wall Street Journal, the export control directive that led to Anthropic cutting off access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5 was triggered in part by cybersecurity research from Amazon and conversations between CEO Andy Jassy and the White House. According to the report, the paper from Amazon claims that, through a series of prompts, it was able to get Fable 5 to serve up information that could be used in cyberattacks. Amazon has yet to respond to a request for comment.

Shortly after Jassy shared the company’s findings with the government, it made the call to block its use by foreign nationals. Complicating this issue is that many of Anthropic’s researchers are foreign-born, meaning they were barred from accessing their own product.

In a statement, Anthropic disputed the government’s characterization of the issue as a “jailbreak.” It argued that many of the same vulnerabilities could be discovered using other publicly available models, including GPT 5.5. Some security researchers appear to back the company’s interpretation. Katie Moussouris, the founder and CEO of LutaSecurity posted on BlueSky that “I’ve seen the paper. It’s not a jailbreak.” Former Commerce Department official Kate Koren speculated to the WSJ that the White House’s dislike of Anthropic may have influenced the decision.

Anthropic and the Trump administration have been at odds for some time over the company’s refusal to allow its AI to be used for mass surveillance of Americans or to power lethal autonomous weapons. In February, Trump instructed federal agencies to stop using Anthropic’s AI. And just hours later, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth designated the company a supply chain risk.

The government and the company seemed to have made amends, and the two had worked together to expand access to Mythos. However, now the two seem destined to clash again.

#Amazon #security #research #reportedly #led #White #Houses #Anthropic #Fable #banAI,Amazon,Anthropic,News,Policy,Politics,Security,Tech

According to the Wall Street Journal, the export control directive that led to Anthropic cutting…

hollywood copy - alina watson

The 28th Shanghai International Film Festival opened on June 12 with the launch of a…

largest stock debut in history. SpaceX sold 555 million shares during the offering, raising $75 billion.

Shares of SpaceX are now trading on the Nasdaq under the ticker symbol SPCX.

The highly anticipated IPO has instantly made SpaceX one of the most valuable companies in the world and is set to make Musk the world’s first trillionaire. It may have also made some Trump administration officials richer.

The listing also gives ordinary investors one of their first chances to buy shares in a major AI company outside of established tech giants like Meta, Microsoft, and Alphabet. SpaceX acquired xAI, parent company of the social media site formerly known as Twitter and the controversial Grok chatbot, earlier this year. Its AI rivals OpenAI and Anthropic also plan to go public this year.

Part of SpaceX’s pitch for its massive IPO is that the company has future earnings potential that frankly has never been claimed by any company in history. In its IPO filing, the company estimates it has a $28.5 trillion total addressable market, with roughly $26.5 trillion expected to come from AI alone.

The sheer size of the offering has already pushed parts of Wall Street to bend some of their rules.

Several major stock market index providers, including Nasdaq and FTSE Russell, have recently changed or adopted fast-entry rules that could allow companies like SpaceX to be added to major indexes much sooner than they normally would.

Once SpaceX is added to these indexes shortly after its IPO, funds that track those indexes may have to buy SpaceX shares. That means regular people could end up with exposure to Musk’s currently unprofitable company, even if they never intentionally bought the stock themselves.

The company is aiming for retail investors to make up about 30% of the offering, well above the roughly 10% typically seen in an IPO.

But not everyone is buying the hype, especially given the company’s current financials. In 2025, SpaceX reported a net loss of $4.9 billion despite generating $18.6 billion in revenue.

S&P Dow Jones Indices announced last week that it is keeping its eligibility rules intact for the S&P 500, the benchmark behind many Americans’ retirement funds, as well as several other major indexes. That means SpaceX will not be fast-tracked into the S&P 500, at least for now.

Morningstar analysts also warned this week that SpaceX may be overvalued at its IPO price. The financial services firm estimated the stock is actually worth about $63 a share, less than half of its $135 IPO price.

The stock is expected to start trading sometime after 10AM on Friday, and it’s probably an understatement to say its first day of price swings will be the most closely watched of all time.

#SpaceX #Hits #Wall #Steet #Biggest #IPO #HistoryAI,SPACEX,Wall Street"> SpaceX Hits Wall Steet With the Biggest IPO in History
                Elon Musk’s rocket, satellite, and AI company SpaceX is finally trading on Wall Street after what feels like a very long buildup to its IPO. The company priced its shares at 5 each Thursday evening, giving SpaceX a valuation of roughly .77 trillion and making it the largest stock debut in history. SpaceX sold 555 million shares during the offering, raising  billion.

 Shares of SpaceX are now trading on the Nasdaq under the ticker symbol SPCX. The highly anticipated IPO has instantly made SpaceX one of the most valuable companies in the world and is set to make Musk the world’s first trillionaire. It may have also made some Trump administration officials richer. The listing also gives ordinary investors one of their first chances to buy shares in a major AI company outside of established tech giants like Meta, Microsoft, and Alphabet. SpaceX acquired xAI, parent company of the social media site formerly known as Twitter and the controversial Grok chatbot, earlier this year. Its AI rivals OpenAI and Anthropic also plan to go public this year.

 Part of SpaceX’s pitch for its massive IPO is that the company has future earnings potential that frankly has never been claimed by any company in history. In its IPO filing, the company estimates it has a .5 trillion total addressable market, with roughly .5 trillion expected to come from AI alone.

 The sheer size of the offering has already pushed parts of Wall Street to bend some of their rules. Several major stock market index providers, including Nasdaq and FTSE Russell, have recently changed or adopted fast-entry rules that could allow companies like SpaceX to be added to major indexes much sooner than they normally would. Once SpaceX is added to these indexes shortly after its IPO, funds that track those indexes may have to buy SpaceX shares. That means regular people could end up with exposure to Musk’s currently unprofitable company, even if they never intentionally bought the stock themselves.

 The company is aiming for retail investors to make up about 30% of the offering, well above the roughly 10% typically seen in an IPO. But not everyone is buying the hype, especially given the company’s current financials. In 2025, SpaceX reported a net loss of .9 billion despite generating .6 billion in revenue. S&P Dow Jones Indices announced last week that it is keeping its eligibility rules intact for the S&P 500, the benchmark behind many Americans’ retirement funds, as well as several other major indexes. That means SpaceX will not be fast-tracked into the S&P 500, at least for now. Morningstar analysts also warned this week that SpaceX may be overvalued at its IPO price. The financial services firm estimated the stock is actually worth about  a share, less than half of its 5 IPO price. The stock is expected to start trading sometime after 10AM on Friday, and it’s probably an understatement to say its first day of price swings will be the most closely watched of all time.      #SpaceX #Hits #Wall #Steet #Biggest #IPO #HistoryAI,SPACEX,Wall Street
Tech-news

largest stock debut in history. SpaceX sold 555 million shares during the offering, raising $75 billion.

Shares of SpaceX are now trading on the Nasdaq under the ticker symbol SPCX.

The highly anticipated IPO has instantly made SpaceX one of the most valuable companies in the world and is set to make Musk the world’s first trillionaire. It may have also made some Trump administration officials richer.

The listing also gives ordinary investors one of their first chances to buy shares in a major AI company outside of established tech giants like Meta, Microsoft, and Alphabet. SpaceX acquired xAI, parent company of the social media site formerly known as Twitter and the controversial Grok chatbot, earlier this year. Its AI rivals OpenAI and Anthropic also plan to go public this year.

Part of SpaceX’s pitch for its massive IPO is that the company has future earnings potential that frankly has never been claimed by any company in history. In its IPO filing, the company estimates it has a $28.5 trillion total addressable market, with roughly $26.5 trillion expected to come from AI alone.

The sheer size of the offering has already pushed parts of Wall Street to bend some of their rules.

Several major stock market index providers, including Nasdaq and FTSE Russell, have recently changed or adopted fast-entry rules that could allow companies like SpaceX to be added to major indexes much sooner than they normally would.

Once SpaceX is added to these indexes shortly after its IPO, funds that track those indexes may have to buy SpaceX shares. That means regular people could end up with exposure to Musk’s currently unprofitable company, even if they never intentionally bought the stock themselves.

The company is aiming for retail investors to make up about 30% of the offering, well above the roughly 10% typically seen in an IPO.

But not everyone is buying the hype, especially given the company’s current financials. In 2025, SpaceX reported a net loss of $4.9 billion despite generating $18.6 billion in revenue.

S&P Dow Jones Indices announced last week that it is keeping its eligibility rules intact for the S&P 500, the benchmark behind many Americans’ retirement funds, as well as several other major indexes. That means SpaceX will not be fast-tracked into the S&P 500, at least for now.

Morningstar analysts also warned this week that SpaceX may be overvalued at its IPO price. The financial services firm estimated the stock is actually worth about $63 a share, less than half of its $135 IPO price.

The stock is expected to start trading sometime after 10AM on Friday, and it’s probably an understatement to say its first day of price swings will be the most closely watched of all time.

#SpaceX #Hits #Wall #Steet #Biggest #IPO #HistoryAI,SPACEX,Wall Street">SpaceX Hits Wall Steet With the Biggest IPO in HistorySpaceX Hits Wall Steet With the Biggest IPO in History
                Elon Musk’s rocket, satellite, and AI company SpaceX is finally trading on Wall Street after what feels like a very long buildup to its IPO. The company priced its shares at $135 each Thursday evening, giving SpaceX a valuation of roughly $1.77 trillion and making it the largest stock debut in history. SpaceX sold 555 million shares during the offering, raising $75 billion.

 Shares of SpaceX are now trading on the Nasdaq under the ticker symbol SPCX. The highly anticipated IPO has instantly made SpaceX one of the most valuable companies in the world and is set to make Musk the world’s first trillionaire. It may have also made some Trump administration officials richer. The listing also gives ordinary investors one of their first chances to buy shares in a major AI company outside of established tech giants like Meta, Microsoft, and Alphabet. SpaceX acquired xAI, parent company of the social media site formerly known as Twitter and the controversial Grok chatbot, earlier this year. Its AI rivals OpenAI and Anthropic also plan to go public this year.

 Part of SpaceX’s pitch for its massive IPO is that the company has future earnings potential that frankly has never been claimed by any company in history. In its IPO filing, the company estimates it has a $28.5 trillion total addressable market, with roughly $26.5 trillion expected to come from AI alone.

 The sheer size of the offering has already pushed parts of Wall Street to bend some of their rules. Several major stock market index providers, including Nasdaq and FTSE Russell, have recently changed or adopted fast-entry rules that could allow companies like SpaceX to be added to major indexes much sooner than they normally would. Once SpaceX is added to these indexes shortly after its IPO, funds that track those indexes may have to buy SpaceX shares. That means regular people could end up with exposure to Musk’s currently unprofitable company, even if they never intentionally bought the stock themselves.

 The company is aiming for retail investors to make up about 30% of the offering, well above the roughly 10% typically seen in an IPO. But not everyone is buying the hype, especially given the company’s current financials. In 2025, SpaceX reported a net loss of $4.9 billion despite generating $18.6 billion in revenue. S&P Dow Jones Indices announced last week that it is keeping its eligibility rules intact for the S&P 500, the benchmark behind many Americans’ retirement funds, as well as several other major indexes. That means SpaceX will not be fast-tracked into the S&P 500, at least for now. Morningstar analysts also warned this week that SpaceX may be overvalued at its IPO price. The financial services firm estimated the stock is actually worth about $63 a share, less than half of its $135 IPO price. The stock is expected to start trading sometime after 10AM on Friday, and it’s probably an understatement to say its first day of price swings will be the most closely watched of all time.      #SpaceX #Hits #Wall #Steet #Biggest #IPO #HistoryAI,SPACEX,Wall Street

Elon Musk’s rocket, satellite, and AI company SpaceX is finally trading on Wall Street after what feels like a very long buildup to its IPO.

The company priced its shares at $135 each Thursday evening, giving SpaceX a valuation of roughly $1.77 trillion and making it the largest stock debut in history. SpaceX sold 555 million shares during the offering, raising $75 billion.

Shares of SpaceX are now trading on the Nasdaq under the ticker symbol SPCX.

The highly anticipated IPO has instantly made SpaceX one of the most valuable companies in the world and is set to make Musk the world’s first trillionaire. It may have also made some Trump administration officials richer.

The listing also gives ordinary investors one of their first chances to buy shares in a major AI company outside of established tech giants like Meta, Microsoft, and Alphabet. SpaceX acquired xAI, parent company of the social media site formerly known as Twitter and the controversial Grok chatbot, earlier this year. Its AI rivals OpenAI and Anthropic also plan to go public this year.

Part of SpaceX’s pitch for its massive IPO is that the company has future earnings potential that frankly has never been claimed by any company in history. In its IPO filing, the company estimates it has a $28.5 trillion total addressable market, with roughly $26.5 trillion expected to come from AI alone.

The sheer size of the offering has already pushed parts of Wall Street to bend some of their rules.

Several major stock market index providers, including Nasdaq and FTSE Russell, have recently changed or adopted fast-entry rules that could allow companies like SpaceX to be added to major indexes much sooner than they normally would.

Once SpaceX is added to these indexes shortly after its IPO, funds that track those indexes may have to buy SpaceX shares. That means regular people could end up with exposure to Musk’s currently unprofitable company, even if they never intentionally bought the stock themselves.

The company is aiming for retail investors to make up about 30% of the offering, well above the roughly 10% typically seen in an IPO.

But not everyone is buying the hype, especially given the company’s current financials. In 2025, SpaceX reported a net loss of $4.9 billion despite generating $18.6 billion in revenue.

S&P Dow Jones Indices announced last week that it is keeping its eligibility rules intact for the S&P 500, the benchmark behind many Americans’ retirement funds, as well as several other major indexes. That means SpaceX will not be fast-tracked into the S&P 500, at least for now.

Morningstar analysts also warned this week that SpaceX may be overvalued at its IPO price. The financial services firm estimated the stock is actually worth about $63 a share, less than half of its $135 IPO price.

The stock is expected to start trading sometime after 10AM on Friday, and it’s probably an understatement to say its first day of price swings will be the most closely watched of all time.

#SpaceX #Hits #Wall #Steet #Biggest #IPO #HistoryAI,SPACEX,Wall Street

Elon Musk’s rocket, satellite, and AI company SpaceX is finally trading on Wall Street after…

fashion-Alizabeth

Athos Commerce launched an all-in-one AI-powered platform designed to help e-commerce brands connect the right…

onto their calendar in one shot. And I have good news for parents with iPhones — the new Siri can finally do this.

After stumbling through its first launch of an AI-imbued Siri, Apple is trying again. The newly upgraded Siri AI can chat with you about what might be killing the roses in your yard, put together a shopping list for the hardware store, and set a reminder to lay down some compost in that flower bed. It can reference information in your email and calendar to make its recommendations or provide an actually helpful answer to the question: “When should I leave for the airport?” And yes, it can even add a list of events from an email to your calendar. I tried all of these scenarios out for myself and I saw it happen. AI Siri is for real this time.

This is like, baby’s first AI assistant stuff, but it’s huge that it actually works.

Honestly Bun Mee is my go-to, so this is a good call.

But it’s also a pretty basic set of features for an AI assistant in 2026, particularly if you compare it to what Gemini has been doing on Android for the past couple of years. Google’s chatbot has been able to add multiple calendar events from a screenshot for at least a year at this point. It’s been diagnosing plant problems and scheduling maintenance reminders for months now, if not longer. New Siri is built on Gemini models, so it makes a lot of sense that the first iteration of Siri AI feels a little bit “Gemini, circa 2025.”

Siri AI has its own flavor, though. Apple has a lot of proprietary stuff going on under the hood and in the cloud. It draws from an on-device pool of data that’s gleaned from things like email and messages. This information is indexed so Siri can tap into the relevant bits when needed. Prompts that can’t be handled fully on device are sent to Apple’s Private Cloud Compute with only the relevant pieces of personal data attached. Gemini handles personal context differently; you opt into sharing your Gmail or calendar, and then it’ll go directly to those sources to get the information when needed.

Siri AI working well depends a lot on the AI understanding context. So far, it’s doing pretty well. I asked it when I needed to return some camera gear I rented for WWDC, and it found the information from a calendar event I’d made and in an email (it’s due back Friday, for the record). Likewise, prompting it with something like “add these events to my calendar” will consistently trigger it to reference the information on my screen. So far, so good.

I couldn’t get Siri to engage in any shenanigans — I didn’t exactly stress test it, but the guardrails were strong enough to return a curt “I can’t help you with that” to a shady prompt. Fair. As a conversationalist, new Siri also seems a bit more dispassionate than Gemini. I gave them both the same prompt asking why the flowers in front of my house seemed to be wilting. They both gave wordy responses with a lot of possible causes, but Gemini’s started with “That is incredibly frustrating…” where Siri was more direct and got right into diagnosing the situation.

Siri AI’s response to my question gets to the point quicker.

Gemini sends its sympathies.

The new Siri handled my follow-up requests well, too. I asked it to recommend a garden center “near home” and it came up with a good suggestion. It also created a new reminder list with some checklist items for my garden rehab project and added a calendar event, all from a single prompt. Pretty basic stuff, but this is Siri. The fact that it works at all is a step forward that’s been years in the making.

New Siri pops up in a lot of places on the iPhone. I’ve gotten into the habit of swiping down on the homescreen and using search to get to apps, and every time I do there’s a big prompt to “search or ask” with a glowing, blinking cursor. Long pressing the wake button summons Siri from the Dynamic Island now, too, rather than presenting it as a glowing border around the screen. The changes all add up to a subtle feeling that you’re never very far away from Siri.

The changes all add up to a subtle feeling that you’re never very far away from Siri

This iteration of Siri feels like the AI assistant you’d build if you knew you couldn’t screw it up. It supports a pretty basic set of features — it’s not out here DoorDashing your burritos for you — but it actually does what’s advertised. For the company that made big promises of Siri two years ago that never materialized, that’s a big deal. “It works” and “It will actually ship to customers” are the two targets that Apple couldn’t miss here. It’s only in a developer beta now, but it’s realer than the first AI Siri we were shown at WWDC ever was. Apple needs this version of Siri to earn back trust. And based on what I’ve seen so far, this looks like a small step toward getting that trust back.

Photography by Allison Johnson / The Verge

Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.
#Siri #worksAI,Apple,Hands-on,Reviews,Tech,WWDC 2026"> I tried Siri AI, and so far it actually worksParents want one thing, and one thing only, out of AI: to add a list of soccer games or “spirit week” theme days from an email or a poorly formatted flyer onto their calendar in one shot. And I have good news for parents with iPhones — the new Siri can finally do this.After stumbling through its first launch of an AI-imbued Siri, Apple is trying again. The newly upgraded Siri AI can chat with you about what might be killing the roses in your yard, put together a shopping list for the hardware store, and set a reminder to lay down some compost in that flower bed. It can reference information in your email and calendar to make its recommendations or provide an actually helpful answer to the question: “When should I leave for the airport?” And yes, it can even add a list of events from an email to your calendar. I tried all of these scenarios out for myself and I saw it happen. AI Siri is for real this time.This is like, baby’s first AI assistant stuff, but it’s huge that it actually works.Honestly Bun Mee is my go-to, so this is a good call.But it’s also a pretty basic set of features for an AI assistant in 2026, particularly if you compare it to what Gemini has been doing on Android for the past couple of years. Google’s chatbot has been able to add multiple calendar events from a screenshot for at least a year at this point. It’s been diagnosing plant problems and scheduling maintenance reminders for months now, if not longer. New Siri is built on Gemini models, so it makes a lot of sense that the first iteration of Siri AI feels a little bit “Gemini, circa 2025.”Siri AI has its own flavor, though. Apple has a lot of proprietary stuff going on under the hood and in the cloud. It draws from an on-device pool of data that’s gleaned from things like email and messages. This information is indexed so Siri can tap into the relevant bits when needed. Prompts that can’t be handled fully on device are sent to Apple’s Private Cloud Compute with only the relevant pieces of personal data attached. Gemini handles personal context differently; you opt into sharing your Gmail or calendar, and then it’ll go directly to those sources to get the information when needed.Siri AI working well depends a lot on the AI understanding context. So far, it’s doing pretty well. I asked it when I needed to return some camera gear I rented for WWDC, and it found the information from a calendar event I’d made and in an email (it’s due back Friday, for the record). Likewise, prompting it with something like “add these events to my calendar” will consistently trigger it to reference the information on my screen. So far, so good.I couldn’t get Siri to engage in any shenanigans — I didn’t exactly stress test it, but the guardrails were strong enough to return a curt “I can’t help you with that” to a shady prompt. Fair. As a conversationalist, new Siri also seems a bit more dispassionate than Gemini. I gave them both the same prompt asking why the flowers in front of my house seemed to be wilting. They both gave wordy responses with a lot of possible causes, but Gemini’s started with “That is incredibly frustrating…” where Siri was more direct and got right into diagnosing the situation.Siri AI’s response to my question gets to the point quicker.Gemini sends its sympathies. The new Siri handled my follow-up requests well, too. I asked it to recommend a garden center “near home” and it came up with a good suggestion. It also created a new reminder list with some checklist items for my garden rehab project and added a calendar event, all from a single prompt. Pretty basic stuff, but this is Siri. The fact that it works at all is a step forward that’s been years in the making.New Siri pops up in a lot of places on the iPhone. I’ve gotten into the habit of swiping down on the homescreen and using search to get to apps, and every time I do there’s a big prompt to “search or ask” with a glowing, blinking cursor. Long pressing the wake button summons Siri from the Dynamic Island now, too, rather than presenting it as a glowing border around the screen. The changes all add up to a subtle feeling that you’re never very far away from Siri.The changes all add up to a subtle feeling that you’re never very far away from SiriThis iteration of Siri feels like the AI assistant you’d build if you knew you couldn’t screw it up. It supports a pretty basic set of features — it’s not out here DoorDashing your burritos for you — but it actually does what’s advertised. For the company that made big promises of Siri two years ago that never materialized, that’s a big deal. “It works” and “It will actually ship to customers” are the two targets that Apple couldn’t miss here. It’s only in a developer beta now, but it’s realer than the first AI Siri we were shown at WWDC ever was. Apple needs this version of Siri to earn back trust. And based on what I’ve seen so far, this looks like a small step toward getting that trust back.Photography by Allison Johnson / The VergeFollow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.Allison JohnsonCloseAllison JohnsonPosts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All by Allison JohnsonAICloseAIPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All AIAppleCloseApplePosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All AppleHands-onCloseHands-onPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All Hands-onReviewsCloseReviewsPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All ReviewsTechCloseTechPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All TechWWDC 2026CloseWWDC 2026Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All WWDC 2026#Siri #worksAI,Apple,Hands-on,Reviews,Tech,WWDC 2026
Tech-news

onto their calendar in one shot. And I have good news for parents with iPhones — the new Siri can finally do this.

After stumbling through its first launch of an AI-imbued Siri, Apple is trying again. The newly upgraded Siri AI can chat with you about what might be killing the roses in your yard, put together a shopping list for the hardware store, and set a reminder to lay down some compost in that flower bed. It can reference information in your email and calendar to make its recommendations or provide an actually helpful answer to the question: “When should I leave for the airport?” And yes, it can even add a list of events from an email to your calendar. I tried all of these scenarios out for myself and I saw it happen. AI Siri is for real this time.

This is like, baby’s first AI assistant stuff, but it’s huge that it actually works.

Honestly Bun Mee is my go-to, so this is a good call.

But it’s also a pretty basic set of features for an AI assistant in 2026, particularly if you compare it to what Gemini has been doing on Android for the past couple of years. Google’s chatbot has been able to add multiple calendar events from a screenshot for at least a year at this point. It’s been diagnosing plant problems and scheduling maintenance reminders for months now, if not longer. New Siri is built on Gemini models, so it makes a lot of sense that the first iteration of Siri AI feels a little bit “Gemini, circa 2025.”

Siri AI has its own flavor, though. Apple has a lot of proprietary stuff going on under the hood and in the cloud. It draws from an on-device pool of data that’s gleaned from things like email and messages. This information is indexed so Siri can tap into the relevant bits when needed. Prompts that can’t be handled fully on device are sent to Apple’s Private Cloud Compute with only the relevant pieces of personal data attached. Gemini handles personal context differently; you opt into sharing your Gmail or calendar, and then it’ll go directly to those sources to get the information when needed.

Siri AI working well depends a lot on the AI understanding context. So far, it’s doing pretty well. I asked it when I needed to return some camera gear I rented for WWDC, and it found the information from a calendar event I’d made and in an email (it’s due back Friday, for the record). Likewise, prompting it with something like “add these events to my calendar” will consistently trigger it to reference the information on my screen. So far, so good.

I couldn’t get Siri to engage in any shenanigans — I didn’t exactly stress test it, but the guardrails were strong enough to return a curt “I can’t help you with that” to a shady prompt. Fair. As a conversationalist, new Siri also seems a bit more dispassionate than Gemini. I gave them both the same prompt asking why the flowers in front of my house seemed to be wilting. They both gave wordy responses with a lot of possible causes, but Gemini’s started with “That is incredibly frustrating…” where Siri was more direct and got right into diagnosing the situation.

Siri AI’s response to my question gets to the point quicker.

Gemini sends its sympathies.

The new Siri handled my follow-up requests well, too. I asked it to recommend a garden center “near home” and it came up with a good suggestion. It also created a new reminder list with some checklist items for my garden rehab project and added a calendar event, all from a single prompt. Pretty basic stuff, but this is Siri. The fact that it works at all is a step forward that’s been years in the making.

New Siri pops up in a lot of places on the iPhone. I’ve gotten into the habit of swiping down on the homescreen and using search to get to apps, and every time I do there’s a big prompt to “search or ask” with a glowing, blinking cursor. Long pressing the wake button summons Siri from the Dynamic Island now, too, rather than presenting it as a glowing border around the screen. The changes all add up to a subtle feeling that you’re never very far away from Siri.

The changes all add up to a subtle feeling that you’re never very far away from Siri

This iteration of Siri feels like the AI assistant you’d build if you knew you couldn’t screw it up. It supports a pretty basic set of features — it’s not out here DoorDashing your burritos for you — but it actually does what’s advertised. For the company that made big promises of Siri two years ago that never materialized, that’s a big deal. “It works” and “It will actually ship to customers” are the two targets that Apple couldn’t miss here. It’s only in a developer beta now, but it’s realer than the first AI Siri we were shown at WWDC ever was. Apple needs this version of Siri to earn back trust. And based on what I’ve seen so far, this looks like a small step toward getting that trust back.

Photography by Allison Johnson / The Verge

Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.

#Siri #worksAI,Apple,Hands-on,Reviews,Tech,WWDC 2026">I tried Siri AI, and so far it actually works

Parents want one thing, and one thing only, out of AI: to add a list of soccer games or “spirit week” theme days from an email or a poorly formatted flyer onto their calendar in one shot. And I have good news for parents with iPhones — the new Siri can finally do this.

After stumbling through its first launch of an AI-imbued Siri, Apple is trying again. The newly upgraded Siri AI can chat with you about what might be killing the roses in your yard, put together a shopping list for the hardware store, and set a reminder to lay down some compost in that flower bed. It can reference information in your email and calendar to make its recommendations or provide an actually helpful answer to the question: “When should I leave for the airport?” And yes, it can even add a list of events from an email to your calendar. I tried all of these scenarios out for myself and I saw it happen. AI Siri is for real this time.

This is like, baby’s first AI assistant stuff, but it’s huge that it actually works.

Honestly Bun Mee is my go-to, so this is a good call.

But it’s also a pretty basic set of features for an AI assistant in 2026, particularly if you compare it to what Gemini has been doing on Android for the past couple of years. Google’s chatbot has been able to add multiple calendar events from a screenshot for at least a year at this point. It’s been diagnosing plant problems and scheduling maintenance reminders for months now, if not longer. New Siri is built on Gemini models, so it makes a lot of sense that the first iteration of Siri AI feels a little bit “Gemini, circa 2025.”

Siri AI has its own flavor, though. Apple has a lot of proprietary stuff going on under the hood and in the cloud. It draws from an on-device pool of data that’s gleaned from things like email and messages. This information is indexed so Siri can tap into the relevant bits when needed. Prompts that can’t be handled fully on device are sent to Apple’s Private Cloud Compute with only the relevant pieces of personal data attached. Gemini handles personal context differently; you opt into sharing your Gmail or calendar, and then it’ll go directly to those sources to get the information when needed.

Siri AI working well depends a lot on the AI understanding context. So far, it’s doing pretty well. I asked it when I needed to return some camera gear I rented for WWDC, and it found the information from a calendar event I’d made and in an email (it’s due back Friday, for the record). Likewise, prompting it with something like “add these events to my calendar” will consistently trigger it to reference the information on my screen. So far, so good.

I couldn’t get Siri to engage in any shenanigans — I didn’t exactly stress test it, but the guardrails were strong enough to return a curt “I can’t help you with that” to a shady prompt. Fair. As a conversationalist, new Siri also seems a bit more dispassionate than Gemini. I gave them both the same prompt asking why the flowers in front of my house seemed to be wilting. They both gave wordy responses with a lot of possible causes, but Gemini’s started with “That is incredibly frustrating…” where Siri was more direct and got right into diagnosing the situation.

Siri AI’s response to my question gets to the point quicker.

Gemini sends its sympathies.

The new Siri handled my follow-up requests well, too. I asked it to recommend a garden center “near home” and it came up with a good suggestion. It also created a new reminder list with some checklist items for my garden rehab project and added a calendar event, all from a single prompt. Pretty basic stuff, but this is Siri. The fact that it works at all is a step forward that’s been years in the making.

New Siri pops up in a lot of places on the iPhone. I’ve gotten into the habit of swiping down on the homescreen and using search to get to apps, and every time I do there’s a big prompt to “search or ask” with a glowing, blinking cursor. Long pressing the wake button summons Siri from the Dynamic Island now, too, rather than presenting it as a glowing border around the screen. The changes all add up to a subtle feeling that you’re never very far away from Siri.

The changes all add up to a subtle feeling that you’re never very far away from Siri

This iteration of Siri feels like the AI assistant you’d build if you knew you couldn’t screw it up. It supports a pretty basic set of features — it’s not out here DoorDashing your burritos for you — but it actually does what’s advertised. For the company that made big promises of Siri two years ago that never materialized, that’s a big deal. “It works” and “It will actually ship to customers” are the two targets that Apple couldn’t miss here. It’s only in a developer beta now, but it’s realer than the first AI Siri we were shown at WWDC ever was. Apple needs this version of Siri to earn back trust. And based on what I’ve seen so far, this looks like a small step toward getting that trust back.

Photography by Allison Johnson / The Verge

Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.
#Siri #worksAI,Apple,Hands-on,Reviews,Tech,WWDC 2026

Parents want one thing, and one thing only, out of AI: to add a list…