Can tech companies learn to love cheaper AI models?
Anthropic recently took its two newest AI models offline due to an export control order from the Trump administration, prompting broad debates about AI policy and digital sovereignty. On the latest episode of TechCrunch’s Equity podcast, Sean O’Kane, Rebecca Bellan, and I discussed what actually prompted the administration’s moves against Anthropic, and what this might mean for the broader AI ecosystem. As Sean put it, “Anthropic has not had the best relationship with the Trump administration in a way that stands apart from the other leading AI labs,” so perhaps other Anthropic’s rivals don’t need to worry about a similar crackdown. But Rebecca also noted that leading cybersecurity experts have “signed an open letter to ask Trump to revoke the order, and they say it’s actually dangerous to have to pull these advanced cybersecurity capabilities from network defenders in the U.S.” And we wondered whether this could all end up being good publicity for Anthropic, especially since — in Rebecca’s words — “everybody loves a bad boy.” Keep reading for a preview of our conversation, edited for length and clarity. Rebecca Bellan: As I’m sure many of our listeners know, the U.S. government basically just forced Anthropic to pull its two newest models offline — Fable 5, and then there was also Mythos 5, which was the one that was available to current Mythos users, [whereas] Fable 5 was more available to the public. They sent a letter [last] Friday that cited “national security concerns.” No one knows what those concerns are. That report has not been made public, they gave no specifics and told [Anthropic] that they had to ensure that those models couldn’t be used by any foreign nationals. So Anthropic was like, “Okay, I guess we have to just pull the models entirely, because we don’t know when someone’s a foreign national. A lot of our own employees are foreigners.” But really, [reports said] the White House got tipped off to this because of some Amazon researchers that allegedly found a way to bypass Fable 5’s guardrails. Amazon CEO Andy Jassy raised these concerns with the White House, and it just kind of spiraled from there. Sean O’Kane: This all moved really fast, especially for a Friday afternoon into a weekend. And it’s at the same time that the administration was ostensibly trying to negotiate some sort of treaty for the war that it started in Iran. Rebecca: Friday evening for us in New York. They love a distraction. Sean: Let’s step real far back for a moment. Anthropic has not had the best relationship with the Trump administration in a way that stands apart from the other leading AI labs — I think there’s an element, at least, of that playing here. So do you think that this is going to have implications for those other companies? Do you think that the Trump administration would be less inclined to sort of turn off the tap on one of those competitors? Anthony Ha: Part of the context here is that both the reporting and an analysis from independent security experts suggest that the actual security risk from Anthropic is not that unique. So a lot of this seems to stem as much from parts of the Trump administration and Anthropic just [not getting] along very well. Whatever risks there are, those things are gonna blow up out of proportion just because it seems like they can’t have a civil phone call with each other. If you’re another company — on the one hand, maybe that’s advantageous to you, because you can say, “Well, we just don’t get these guys mad at us and we can do what we want.” But that’s also not a great regulatory landscape to just [say], “Boy, I hope they don’t get mad at us.” Rebecca: On the one hand, it definitely feels retaliatory — after the government labeled Anthropic a supply chain risk, there’s this big lawsuit going on between them, it really feels like the White House is just looking out for any excuse to pummel Anthropic. And I feel that way not only because that was my initial reaction, but beca
