<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Who decides when AI is too dangerous? — Live Feed</title><link>https://www.live-feeds.com/feed/who-decides-when-ai-is-too-dangerous</link><atom:link xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" href="https://www.live-feeds.com/feed/who-decides-when-ai-is-too-dangerous/rss.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><description>Continuously updated, source-cited coverage.</description>
<item><title>White House and Anthropic Negotiate Security Rules After Fable 5 Ban</title><link>https://www.live-feeds.com/feed/who-decides-when-ai-is-too-dangerous</link><guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.live-feeds.com/feed/who-decides-when-ai-is-too-dangerous#u11141</guid><pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2026 09:27:19 +0000</pubDate><description>The US government classified Anthropic&amp;#039;s Fable 5 model as a dangerous munition on June 12, 2026. This led to export controls prohibiting foreign nationals from accessing the tool. The White House and Anthropic are now discussing the establishment of AI security rules.What's confirmed:Anthropic released the Fable generative AI model on June 9th.The US government classified Fable 5 as a dangerous munition on June 12, 2026.The White House and Anthropic are working to set AI security rules following export controls on Fable 5.Export controls prohibit foreign nationals from accessing Fable 5.S</description></item>
<item><title>Dispute Over AI Oversight Authority Persists</title><link>https://www.live-feeds.com/feed/who-decides-when-ai-is-too-dangerous</link><guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.live-feeds.com/feed/who-decides-when-ai-is-too-dangerous#u7648</guid><pubDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2026 01:25:32 +0000</pubDate><description>The Trump administration is attempting to implement a new AI regulatory framework. This effort has caused a conflict with Anthropic regarding the Claude Mythos Preview. U.S. intelligence agencies and the Commerce Department are currently arguing over who has oversight authority.Still unconfirmed:A study by MIT FutureTech and the University of Queensland involved 272 specialists from 37 countries to prioritize AI risks.The release of the Claude Mythos Preview has led to a regulatory debacle for Anthropic.Some individuals believe AI progress should slow down despite potential medical benefits li</description></item>
<item><title>Government and Industry Clash Over AI Danger Thresholds</title><link>https://www.live-feeds.com/feed/who-decides-when-ai-is-too-dangerous</link><guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.live-feeds.com/feed/who-decides-when-ai-is-too-dangerous#u5992</guid><pubDate>Sat, 20 Jun 2026 13:11:05 +0000</pubDate><description>The Trump administration is pursuing a new AI regulation regime. This has created a conflict with Anthropic over the public release of the Claude Mythos Preview. U.S. intelligence agencies and the Commerce Department are currently disputing who holds oversight authority.Still unconfirmed:AI companies are producing models they claim the public cannot have.</description></item>
<item><title>Conflict Over AI Safety Governance and Anthropic's Model Releases</title><link>https://www.live-feeds.com/feed/who-decides-when-ai-is-too-dangerous</link><guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.live-feeds.com/feed/who-decides-when-ai-is-too-dangerous#u4621</guid><pubDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2026 11:46:28 +0000</pubDate><description>The Trump administration is implementing a new AI regulation regime that has led to a showdown with Anthropic. This conflict centers on who determines when a model is too dangerous for public release, specifically regarding the Claude Mythos Preview. A turf war persists within the U.S. government between intelligence agencies and the Commerce Department over oversight authority.What's confirmed:Anthropic decided the Claude Mythos Preview was too dangerous for public release due to its ability to exploit software vulnerabilities.The Trump administration&amp;#039;s AI regulation regime is currently </description></item>
</channel></rss>