This is a good update for getting access to Fable. It also gives us a view into what the future is likely going to look like with AI regulation.
The government will have frameworks that are used to determine future model releases past a certain threshold of capability or compute levels. Given all the constituents involved, and the economic and societal significance of AI, this was practically an inevitability.
It may seem small but the implications are massive. It will mean that each model update will go through an extensive review, testing, and feedback process. And in that processes lots of groups will weigh in on the risk of the model, and there will be lots of subjectivity on what the actual risks are or practicalities of exploiting those risks.
A positive potential future here would be we still get massive model progress but they just happen in bigger jumps at once, where the labs pack in major improvements since the cost and slow down of each review stacks up.
On the other side, the risk is that past a certain threshold we may not get to see the rapid back and forth of model progress that we’ve gotten used to which can have negative compounding effects. Hoping for the former outcome.
Sophia Cai (@SophiaCai99)
NEW: White House and Anthropic are working to create a formal technical assessment framework that can quantify the severity of the jailbreak in question and create a standardized methodology for evaluating similar incidents in the future.
It’s the clearest sign yet that talks are moving forward and it reflects an understanding that no AI model can be completely immune to hacking.
Aim is to developing a common set of benchmarks that could be used to assess future jailbreaks, including the extent to which safeguards were bypassed, the capabilities exposed, and the practical consequences of the breach.
w/ @cheyennehaslett
politico.com/news/2026/06/18…
— https://nitter.net/SophiaCai99/status/2067696772840063370#m