Why, is there any evidence to support your claim?

There is a long history of US export restrictions on technologies. They have all been temporary.

It would be extraordinary if this was the beginning of the first ever permanent technology export restriction.

Temporary as in it lasted for quite some years, not temporary as in it was dropped within months. That's a very long timescale for this sort of field.

From outside the US, there has been so much "extraordinary" stuff happening in US politics recently that it's almost expected now.

It doesn't matter, because people are adopting AI now, and even if the restrictions are lifted tomorrow, it has been proven that relying on an American SaaS is risky, because you can just lose access.

So why would you get that instead of self-hosting Mistral Studio and fine tuning for your needs? Or going fully DIY with e.g. OpenShift AI and open source Chinese models?

That way you fully control availability, costs and quality.

Polymarket gives 32% chance the ban on Fable is lifted this month.

Even if it's never lifted, probably GPT 5.6 will be better than Opus 4.8 and they won't hype it up as too dangerous to release before releasing it.

Open models will catch up to Opus 4.8 and state of the art will, most likely, continue to get better. It won't be long before "better than Opus 4.8" is not a big deal.

> Polymarket gives 32% chance the ban on Fable is lifted this month.

Totally meaningless.

It's June 30 and the ban has been lifted, I'm gonna say Polymarket's 32% chance of the ban being lifted in June was far and away a better guess than bemoaning that non-Americans will never access an American model better than Opus 4.8.

Polymarket's 32% wasn't "a guess", it's just noise with zero connection to the actual likelihood of the event.

"This particular band of gambling addicts have bet money on a particular outcome at a ratio of 68:32, so there is a 32% chance of it happening."

Wow, how informative. Maybe I should go check my horoscope for if the Iran war will end next week...

> probably GPT 5.6 will be better than Opus 4.8 and they won't hype it up as too dangerous to release before releasing it.

If you buy the story that Anthropic's marketing hype drove US regulation, then I have a bridge to sell you.

The best case real reason is Anthropic pissed off the administration.

Which will leave OpenAI, Google, Meta, and X far more vulnerable to government data sharing requests... and KYC identity is incredibly valuable to mandate for those.

That is my best guess too, which is an even better case for better-than-Opus-4.8 models being available from OpenAI without drawing the attention of the administration.

I do think their marketing hype was a factor though even in this narrative. Andrew Jassy tells a vengeful admin that there's this jailbreak for a model Anthropic said was dangerous, and vengeful admin seizes the opportunity to take vengeance.

I think any optimism about future OpenAI models is discounting the avarice of the current US administration.

Having succeeded with Anthropic, it's reasonable to expect their next attempt will be:

"Nice new model, OpenAI, would be a shame if national security concerns tangled up a public release. Now let's talk about equity stakes..."

My belief that OpenAI will release a model better than Opus 4.8 globally should not be interpreted as a claim that they will avoid a shakedown. I think if they encounter corruption, they will engage with it.