Pre-release testing of frontier AI models has so far rested on a loose set of voluntary arrangements. Labs share early versions with government testers, the testers probe them for risk, and the results inform both the companies and the public officials watching them. That model assumed allies would cooperate. A new request from Washington suggests the order of access now matters as much as access itself.
According to a report by Politico, the White House has asked OpenAI and Anthropic to hold back new models from the UK's AI Security Institute (AISI) until the US government has completed its own review. The request came from the Office of the National Cyber Director.
Most debates about AI and jobs focus on the workplace: which roles will shrink, which will change and which will survive. At the Communication University of China (CUC) in Beijing, that debate has already reached the course catalogue.
In 2025, the university cut or merged a total of 16 bachelor's programmes. Photography and translation no longer exist as standalone degrees. Comics, fashion design and visual communication design were also among the affected programmes. According to Liao Xiangzhong, the university's Party secretary, the reason is the progress of artificial intelligence.
"A waste of resources"
Liao's argument is blunt. In his view, AI has already largely taken over translation, so a four-year degree devoted only to that skill wastes resources. He applied similar reasoning to photography, saying the classic form of the discipline can no longer stand on its own as a separate subject.
Most safety checks on frontier AI models have so far been brief. An outside group gets access shortly before launch, runs its tests, and the model ships. That approach can catch obvious problems. It is less useful for judging whether a company's safety claims hold up across training, testing and real-world deployment.
OpenAI now wants to change that picture. In a framework titled "Priorities and principles for effective third party assessments," the company sets out how independent reviewers could get far deeper access to the way its models are built, evaluated and used. The idea is that assessors verify safety claims themselves rather than taking the company's word for it, and form their own view on whether safeguards actually work.
Most of the debate about AI-generated text has focused on what these systems can write. Less attention goes to a quieter question: whether anyone can later tell that a machine wrote it. Anthropic has now given its answer for a larger part of its Claude lineup.
From 30 September 2026, the company will apply its previously announced text watermark to three more models: Claude Fable 5, Claude Sonnet 5 and Claude Opus 4.8. Anthropic shared the news with customers by email. Its stated reason is compliance with the transparency requirements of the EU AI Act.
Most of the conversation around AI infrastructure is about capacity: more gigawatts, more campuses, more compute for the companies training frontier models. That makes sense on an investor slide. It is less helpful when a single site in New Mexico depends on a gas pipeline that has not yet been built.
Oracle has sent a force majeure notice to the developer behind Project Jupiter, a data centre campus in New Mexico that forms part of the Stargate initiative. Bloomberg first reported the move on Thursday. The notice does not mean Oracle is walking away. It does show how much of the AI build-out now rests on permits, pipelines and power supplies that no tech company fully controls.
CyrioX is financed by advertising. You can choose how you want to use this website:
With advertising: we load an advertising script from a third-party ad network. The ad network may set cookies, use your IP address and device information, and may process data outside the EU.
Ad-free for €0.99 per month: no advertising and no advertising tracking. Cancel at any time.
You can change your decision at any time via "Cookie Settings" at the bottom of every page.
