alt Hacker NewsU.S. government will decide who gets to use GPT-5.6
Comments
It's quite funny to think about the reaction this would be getting from people like David Sacks, if it was literally anybody except Trump.
Can anyone explain to me (a non US citizen) how this won't be found to be unconstitutional (eventually)?. I would think it falls under freedom of expression. And given the attempted classification of encryption as a munition that failed, I don't see how this can possibly last?
Oh no, the powerful tool that can be used for good or evil is restricted by the people whose job it is to restrict dangerous things! This is the end of freedom! We're all doomed!
Damn. This is the second post today that just disappeared from the top of the landing page. This is 100% manipulated.
Will these ad hoc decisions by the U.S. government, without law or clear process, not hurt the coming IPO's of Anthropic and OpenAI?
Top 2 comments fail to acknowledge the elephant in the room.
It's not about the tech. We have a corrupt administration gatekeeping two powerful models for companies set to go public soon.
I bet the models are powerful.
I also bet there is a lot of money being exchanged, too, for keeping the bubble big, so certain people will profit.
Trump doesn't care about the people. He cares about himself.
Local AI and open-weight models are becoming something to no longer ignore. I've started a community around this @tokenstead on X and tokenstead.ai YouTube and much more coming. DGX Spark on route, RTX 5090s and much more exciting builds. We need to have AI sovereignty!
It's pretty easy to solve. You just keep pushing new versions of Opus 4.8....
"for the benefit of all humanity *"
* with big pockets
Less money to US AI tech. This could be good long term to move us away from them.
never thought being a script kiddie would make me smart, but here we are in 2026.
i had one place, they were using all these shady pay with a credit card for "points" to do these web gui things that were... basically nmap, dig, etc?
so i wrote up a small shell script that took in the servers our (often nonprofit) clients wanted scanned...
and so we could lower our costs and free up analyst time -- but sadly they often found out they had out of date windows boxen they couldn't afford to fix, and we'd have to settle for getting them onto MFA, using password managers and basics like that.
people overvalue AI imho. people are getting weak, they don't teach themselves the concepts that would allow them to make best use of AI.
anyways, i think the type of person freaking out is the same who's been cutting and pasting from stack overflow rather than learning enough to grab a book or read up on a library to get the needful done.
but hey, what do i know? i'm just some freak on hacker news
(proudly writing w/o AI :-))
Great so we just need to wait for China to catch up I guess
What are the odds this is going to become another avenue for grift - magically any companies the trump family invests in are going to get access. Any companies that aren't sufficiently 'loyal' to the regime will have to wait or may never get access.
David Sacks has been silent for a long time.. So much for being the big “AI czar”. Does he have any influence left in the government?
This makes no sense, it only will embolden any attempts by china and other countries to move away from depending on US AI tech
Non-paywall: https://archive.is/PCQQl
I can't tell if this is bad for the big labs, or good because it means they now have an excuse for not showing meaningful progress in the lead ups to their IPOs.
Wowzers. It's been some time since export controls were something i'd see in software. Interesting times.
>“We don’t believe this kind of government access process should become the long-term default. It keeps the best tools from users, developers, enterprises, cyber defenders, and global partners who need them,” the blog post said. “We are taking this short-term step because we believe it is the strongest path to broader availability in the coming weeks.”
Arent these the same clowns who keep saying that the government needs to regulate AI to protect society [from their competitors] or whatever? And im not just talking about back when they used to be a nonprofit, Altman was still using that line post-sellout too.
> We don’t believe this kind of government access process should become the long-term default.
Really glad to see some reasonably prominent pushback against this government overreach.
The information has been reporting that the government wants to individually approve which companies get access and when.
Imagine the wonderful opportunities for corruption and influence peddling, not to mention, excluding any companies that don’t support Trump
what's weird, is my employees abroad (outside the US) have access to Anthropic Fable .... so what exactly did we prevent by limiting United States citizens from having access ....
This will be a thing of the past sooner than you expect.
So I guess the Chinese government will decide what model I use next
Does this mean that the government will compensate OpenAI for lost revenue?
This post isn't even on the landing page for some reason.
It seems like sota ai will go the way of reserve antibiotics
U.S. government will decide who will feed the chinese competition.
I’m generally prefer republicans, but not in favor of this!
So much for the party of small government.
Looks like China wins the AI race
There is an assumption that everyone is making here - that China will not do the same. It is entirely possible, that China restricts their frontier models - as and when they are developed - to only Chinese citizens. And India follows along.
IMO AI is different from everything else. It is a weapon as potent as nuclear. It is only natural that it be treated as one.
Ah, so the specter of Biden doing it was bad, but this administration putting into practice is great.
Without access to leading models, I think open source LLM development will also slow down. I'm not sure which portion of their success right now is due to RLAF and distillation but it's certainly not zero.
All these dorks think they're Iron Man. Guess they're on the Civil War stage of his character development.
Just seems like gatekeeping for graft and favors / corruption.
In a scenario where some breakthrough in fusion energy will be discovered I envision:
- instant, total world war if it's not coming from USA
- let's finish all oil's reserve first otherwise
Those taking issue with the clear deference to the current U.S. administration would seemingly prefer it be the exact same degree of preemptive compliance and collaboration, just done behind closed doors as it was with the Biden administration. The sausage is apparently far more palatable when you only find out about the overreach, pressuring, implied threats, and censorship years later in House Judiciary Committees. Or even better if you don’t through use of NSL gag orders or implied threat of lawfare!
There's a huge difference between 'pro market' and 'buddies with some big businesses' and this administration is making it very clear, at least to those who would see.
https://blog.supplysideliberal.com/post/47857230937/luigi-zi...
Honest question: for those working with those models on offensive security, how much does this move make sense?
I am asking because I have seen a growing number of stories about organizations getting owned by either raw mismanagement of security, supply chain attacks that are often a failure at the ecosystem level, npm, etc.
I am not really seeing from what we hear about the use of AI for penetration as a threat yet. The growing problem with security seems to be more at the management and ecosystem layers.
Not many story that netfilter, ipfw or pf got owned by one of those frontier models.
A lot of stories that organisation X and Y left keys on a public repo for months.
A big problem is "U.S. government" muddies the conversation because of how undefinable and large that group is.
Who is deciding who gets to use GPT-5.6? Which organizations? Which leaders?
Focus on that to have a clearer conversation. Without doing this it's like jerking each other off to stroke our egos. You might as well as say "The World will decide who gets to use GPT-5.6"
Can we just go ahead and shut the US down right now? We had a good run, but we've clearly been moving in the wrong direction for almost as long as I've been alive.
huge momentum for local and open-source LLMs
> while AI companies and the administration work out a longer-term plan for regulation on the sector.
It’s not really the executives job or role to create new regulatory structures. If they want something durable, that lasts more than one administration, they need actual laws passed by Congress.