It’s not about Anthropic vs. OpenAI anymore
AI models have progressed to the point where their capabilities have real political consequences. Dealing with those consequences will require collective action.
The U.S. government is set to take an awful lot of control over which AI models get released.
Two weeks after the U.S. government pulled Anthropic’s Fable and Mythos models , OpenAI’s new model seems to be headed for the same limbo. The Information broke the news Thursday that GPT 5.6 would be released only into limited preview, with the government approving the release “customer by customer” until a general release can be approved.
If that preview only lasts a “couple of weeks,” as Altman reportedly projected, that might not be a particularly big problem. But Mythos has already been in preview for months, and there’s no indication it will make it to general release any time soon. Even a few weeks spent in review could significantly limit the economic upside of a costly new system, at a time when AI labs are trying desperately to improve their bottom lines. If the pace of model development slows as a result, it’s likely to put a similar chill on the ongoing data center buildout.
If this goes bad, the entire industry could be at risk.
Critically, OpenAI and Anthropic are now in the same exact position with the same problems facing them and the same disaster waiting if they fail. Conversations within the tech industry tend to focus on the role of one side or another in bringing this on, either accusing Anthropic of running a regulatory capture scheme or accusing OpenAI of cozying up to Trump to ice out a rival. It’s understandable; many of the most prominent people in the industry have billions of dollars riding on one company or the other.
But what’s happening now is bigger than that. The cost of implementing a haphazard government approval process for every frontier model is obvious, and there’s no fix that helps one lab without helping the others.
The most immediate problem is simply establishing a release process that makes sense. It’s fine for the government to test models before release (this is how it works for lots of consumer products) — but as GMU fellow (and soon-to-be OpenAI employee) Dean Ball detailed in an eloquent post this morning , it’s not clear what kind of safety assurances could be put in place to satisfy regulators. The U.S. government doesn’t have the expertise or capacity for the kind of testing that would be needed here. It’s not even clear what regulators would be trying to protect against, since there’s been no effort to articulate what risks the government is actually concerned about.
It’s tempting to see the government process as the whole of the problem itself, but there are real concerns underneath. Even if you don’t believe the Mythos hype, there’s clear evidence of how AI tools are revolutionizing cybersecurity. There are similar processes at work in biorisk and alignment. Restricting model releases can’t be the whole answer in itself — that will only limit what’s available to the public — but there are real concerns to be addressed.
The best ideas for addressing them, as laid out by Ball, will mean working together. It will mean trusting independent groups to guide the process, even if they don’t completely align with your goals. It will mean lining up behind the least-bad regulatory options available, instead of fighting every regulation tooth and nail. And most of all, it will mean fighting for AI as an industry, instead of seeing safety and regulation as opportunities to gain an advantage.
For a lot of people working in AI, that will be a tough sell. Unfortunately, AI models have progressed to the point where their capabilities have real political consequences. Dealing with those consequences will require collective action. In the weeks to come, we’ll find out if that’s something the industry is capable of.
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission . This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.
Last chance to save up to $190 on TechCrunch Founder Summit. Join 1,000+ founders and VCs at all stages for real-world scaling insights and connections that move the needle. Savings end June 26, 11:59 p.m. PT .
Trump administration proposes axing brake-pedal requirement for AVs in a boost for Tesla Sean O'Kane
Trump administration proposes axing brake-pedal requirement for AVs in a boost for Tesla
Trump administration proposes axing brake-pedal requirement for AVs in a boost for Tesla
Former Infosys chief has a new startup that wants to challenge the IT services world Jagmeet Singh
Former Infosys chief has a new startup that wants to challenge the IT services world
Former Infosys chief has a new startup that wants to challenge the IT services world
OpenAI unveils its first custom chip, built by Broadcom Russell Brandom
OpenAI unveils its first custom chip, built by Broadcom
OpenAI unveils its first custom chip, built by Broadcom
Slate Auto’s radically simple electric truck starts at $24,950 Sean O'Kane
Slate Auto’s radically simple electric truck starts at $24,950
Slate Auto’s radically simple electric truck starts at $24,950
HaloBraid raises $7M from Seven Seven Six to end the six-hour hair salon appointment Dominic-Madori Davis
HaloBraid raises $7M from Seven Seven Six to end the six-hour hair salon appointment
HaloBraid raises $7M from Seven Seven Six to end the six-hour hair salon appointment
WhatsApp gets new chief as Meta taps India’s CRED founder Kunal Shah and invests $900M in startup Jagmeet Singh
WhatsApp gets new chief as Meta taps India’s CRED founder Kunal Shah and invests $900M in startup
WhatsApp gets new chief as Meta taps India’s CRED founder Kunal Shah and invests $900M in startup
Every new iOS 27 feature that’s worth knowing about Lauren Forristal
Every new iOS 27 feature that’s worth knowing about
Every new iOS 27 feature that’s worth knowing about
Pontos-chave
- A regulação de IA nos EUA pode influenciar a abordagem do Brasil em relação à inovação e segurança.
- O aumento da burocracia pode desestimular investimentos em startups de IA no Brasil.
- A colaboração entre setor privado e reguladores será crucial para um modelo eficaz de regulação.
Análise editorial
A situação atual envolvendo a regulação de modelos de IA nos EUA tem implicações significativas para o setor de tecnologia no Brasil. À medida que o governo americano intensifica o controle sobre o lançamento de novos modelos, isso pode servir como um alerta para os reguladores brasileiros. O Brasil, que já enfrenta desafios em termos de infraestrutura e capacitação técnica, pode se ver pressionado a estabelecer um framework regulatório que não apenas proteja os consumidores, mas que também não iniba a inovação. A experiência dos EUA pode fornecer lições valiosas sobre como equilibrar segurança e progresso tecnológico.
Além disso, a crescente dependência de um processo de aprovação governamental pode impactar o ecossistema de startups e empresas emergentes no Brasil. Se a burocracia se tornar um entrave, isso pode desestimular investimentos em IA e tecnologias relacionadas, especialmente em um momento em que o país busca se posicionar como um hub de inovação na América Latina. O Brasil precisa considerar como pode fomentar um ambiente que permita a experimentação e o desenvolvimento, ao mesmo tempo em que garante a segurança e a ética no uso da IA.
O que observar a seguir é como as empresas de tecnologia, tanto nos EUA quanto no Brasil, irão se adaptar a essas novas exigências regulatórias. A colaboração entre o setor privado e os órgãos reguladores será crucial para desenvolver um modelo que funcione para todos. Além disso, a forma como as empresas se posicionam em relação a essas mudanças pode influenciar a percepção pública sobre a IA e seu potencial, tanto positiva quanto negativamente. O Brasil deve estar atento a essas dinâmicas para não perder oportunidades de liderança no campo da IA.
Por fim, é importante ressaltar que a situação atual não se limita apenas a uma disputa entre gigantes da tecnologia, mas reflete uma necessidade mais ampla de um diálogo sobre a responsabilidade e a ética na IA. O Brasil, com sua diversidade e complexidade social, pode se beneficiar de uma discussão mais profunda sobre como a IA pode ser utilizada para o bem comum, evitando armadilhas que podem surgir de uma regulação excessivamente restritiva ou mal orientada.
O que esta cobertura entrega
- Atribuicao clara de fonte com link para a publicacao original.
- Enquadramento editorial sobre relevancia, impacto e proximos desdobramentos.
- Revisao de legibilidade, contexto e duplicacao antes da publicacao.
Fonte original:
TechCrunch AISobre este artigo
Este artigo foi curado e publicado pelo AIDaily como parte da nossa cobertura editorial sobre desenvolvimentos em inteligência artificial. O conteúdo é baseado na fonte original citada abaixo, enriquecido com contexto e análise editorial. Ferramentas automatizadas podem auxiliar tradução e estruturação inicial, mas a decisão de publicar, a revisão factual e o enquadramento de contexto seguem responsabilidade editorial.
Saiba mais sobre nosso processo editorial