“The U.S. government has lifted its export controls on Anthropic’s leading models, ending a weeks-long impasse between the $1 trillion AI company and the Trump administration,” the Financial Times reports.

“The U.S. Department of Commerce told Anthropic it had lifted the ban on Tuesday evening allowing the AI company to re-release its latest model, Fable 5, to the general public.”

The Atlantic: “The State Department last week released records from the exchange, found on the phones of Rubio and Needham, in response to Freedom of Information Act litigation by Democracy Forward, which has filed more than 400 legal actions against the Trump administration since last January. The new release, which we reviewed, includes 13 Signal chats from the first six months of 2025 that have not been previously reported…”

“The records raise the possibility that top administration officials failed to follow federal laws that require the preservation of government records. A screenshot from Rubio’s phone shows that Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Dan Caine was the administrator of a Signal group with Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Rubio that was set to automatically delete messages after eight hours, prompting questions about whether the communications were retained another way.”

New York Times: “Republican and Democratic candidates and strategists who were once wary of A.I. tools or overwhelmed by them are now rushing to give their campaigns an A.I. upgrade. Those who do so could reap the rewards in the midterm elections in November and, ultimately, in the 2028 presidential campaign. Those who don’t could fall far behind.”

“But this seismic shift in how politicians run for office is also being met by pushback on multiple fronts, including from voters and campaign staffers who feel distrustful of A.I. and fearful about its potential to wipe out jobs, devour energy and harm the planet.”

David Brooks: “I’d say that a guiding principle of the emerging AI age is this: When intelligence is plentiful, volition is valuable. The people who are going to make a difference are not the ones who seek relaxation and passively use AI to work less. They are the ones who will seek improvement and actively wrestle with AI to develop their own mental capabilities and accomplish more.”

“In other words, what will differentiate people is not how smart they are but their relationship to mental effort. Right now, some people have what psychologists call a high need for cognition. They enjoy thinking hard. These are the people who enjoy playing difficult games and reading dense books. On the other end of the spectrum, there are the cognitive misers, the people who find it unpleasant to think hard and take any opportunity not to do it. In the middle are the people who have a medium need for cognition. They will put in the effort when they really care about something, but they don’t intrinsically enjoy it. Need for cognition correlates with intelligence but is not the same thing. We all know a lot of really smart people who don’t like to work hard.”

“Chinese artificial-intelligence systems have matched the performance of Anthropic’s powerful model Mythos in some cybersecurity scenarios, a development poised to reset the global tech race and pressure the White House in its overhaul of U.S. AI policy,” the Wall Street Journal reports.

South China Morning Post: Young Americans feel more threatened by AI than young Chinese. Why?

“The Trump administration is close to allowing Anthropic to restore access to its powerful Fable 5 model, which has been offline for 15 days because of security fears by the government,” Axios reports.

“Insiders expect the administration’s limits on Fable 5 could be lifted as soon as this coming week.”

The Economist: “Advances in artificial intelligence have long terrified techies. Lately, voters are feeling the angst, too. AI is unpopular in the West and climbing up the political agenda. The fiercest fights so far have been in America, where protests against data centers have scuppered nearly $100bn-worth of projects, warring AI megadonors have just dumped tens of millions into a Manhattan congressional race and around 40% of voters tell pollsters that they want AI banned from most industries.”

“But spats are breaking out elsewhere: after chipmaking profits soared recently, workers at Samsung in South Korea threatened a strike to secure special payouts.”

“The backlash is only just getting started, because the technology is only just getting started, too.”

Bloomberg: “Driven by a flood of Silicon Valley money, AI has emerged as one of the biggest financial forces in this year’s US elections, fueled by hundreds of millions of dollars from tech billionaires led by venture capitalist Marc Andreessen and OpenAI co-founder Greg Brockman. Their goal is simple: elect a slate of candidates who will heed their calls for looser government oversight of the nascent technology.”

“All that spending has run headlong into deepening bipartisan resentment of AI itself, touched off by the nationwide proliferation of data centers and intensified by companies embracing the technology in a bid to reduce labor costs.”

For members: How AI Will Change Politics in 2028 and Beyond

“OpenAI’s newest artificial intelligence model will be available only to a small group of U.S. companies and organizations approved by the Trump administration, further signaling the Trump administration is tightening the reins on AI regulation,” Politico reports.

Financial Times: Trump administration asks OpenAI to stagger release of new model to vet users.

Paul Krugman: “First, we fear that AI will do terrible things because the companies selling it told us it would do terrible things. Last year, for example, Anthropic CEO Darius Amodei declared in an interview with Axios that AI could wipe out half of entry-level white-collar jobs and drive overall unemployment as high as 20 percent within 1 to 5 years.”

“More recently Amodei and OpenAI’s Sam Altman have tried to walk back their predictions of a ‘jobs apocalypse’. But why were they so willing to promote apocalyptic visions in the first place? The answer is money. They pushed the idea that they had a technology that would quickly and utterly transform the economy partly to dazzle Wall Street and secure financing, and partly to scare businesses into rushing into AI adoption for fear of being left behind.”

“Only belatedly did they realize that declaring that your technology will wreak devastation would lead to a public backlash, and that this backlash would be a serious problem..”

“Second, many ordinary people view AI negatively because they feel that it is being forced on them.”

Washington Post: “The Washington Post tested the AI models behind OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Google’s Gemini and others using political questions designed by researchers to gauge how chatbots respond to hot-button political issues. The results suggest that chatbots have clear political leanings that can conflict with promises made by the companies behind them.”

“The model that powers ChatGPT answered nearly every question exclusively with left-leaning arguments and presented only right-leaning positions just once. Google’s Gemini mostly took a both-sides approach, offering both left and right positions in more than 90 percent of its answers.”

“The House of Representatives on Wednesday will begin consideration of a bill to force tech companies to pay for artificial intelligence’s strain on the power grid, as voters across the country express dissatisfaction with data centers driving up utility costs,” CNBC reports.

Bloomberg: “Recent plans for energy projects or green regulations have spurred high volumes of public comments, often generated with the help of automation tools and artificial intelligence, which have raised concerns about misrepresenting public opinion.”

“The use of AI in these campaigns has led to fears about the integrity of the public comment process and prompted discussion of how to guard against bad actors, with some agencies considering new systems to screen out potentially AI-generated comments.”

Semafor: “Only 7% of US adults said they rely on AI tools ‘a great deal’ or ‘a fair amount’ to get news and information, according to the May polling, while a majority — 57% — responded that they don’t use the technology for news at all.”