News & Updates
The latest news and updates from companies in the WLTH portfolio.
Perplexity AI rolls out 'Personal Computer for Mac,' delivering advanced AI orchestration
In a significant step toward more integrated AI assistance, Perplexity AI announced today the rollout of Personal Computer for Mac, a powerful local extension of its previously launched Perplexity Computer system. The new offering aims to transform how users interact with their devices by enabling AI to handle complex, cross-application workflows with access to local files, native apps, and the web. Personal Computer builds on Perplexity Computer -- introduced in February 2026 as a cloud-based system capable of orchestrating multi-model AI workflows that can run for extended periods -- by bringing that intelligence directly onto the user's hardware. It hybridizes local and server environments to deliver enhanced security, productivity, and personalization while acting as an intelligent orchestrator across a user's digital ecosystem. "The computer evolves," the Perplexity team wrote in their announcement. Historically, computers have moved closer to the user and their work -- from room-sized machines to desktop devices. Now, AI is shifting the paradigm again: instead of users manually juggling apps, files, and tabs, a modern AI-powered computer can understand objectives, break them into steps, and execute work across tools autonomously. How Personal Computer Works Personal Computer integrates deeply with a user's Mac, accessing local files, native applications, connectors, and web resources in a unified orchestration layer. Users can initiate complex tasks via simple natural language requests, such as: * Reading and completing items on a to-do list in the Notes app by reasoning through steps and acting across iMessage, email, local files, connected apps, and the web. * Organizing a cluttered Downloads folder into logically named project folders. * Comparing local documents with up-to-date web information to support decision-making or task completion. The system supports voice interaction and can run persistently. Perplexity particularly highlights running it on a Mac mini, which can operate 24/7 for always-available workflows or secure local access. Tasks can be started from an iPhone or managed on the go, with the AI continuing work in the background. Emphasis on User Control and Security Security and transparency are central to the design. Perplexity stresses that users remain in control: the system keeps humans "in the loop" for sensitive actions, provides visibility into its steps, and allows intervention when needed. Files are handled in a secure sandbox, actions are auditable and reversible, and the overall experience is designed to feel like managing a capable team rather than handing over unchecked access. Personal Computer for Mac is beginning its rollout today exclusively to Perplexity Max subscribers, with priority given to those on the waitlist. Interested users can download it via the link provided on Perplexity's site. This launch follows earlier announcements of Personal Computer concepts in March 2026, where it was positioned as a persistent, local AI agent running on dedicated hardware like a Mac mini, offering always-on capabilities while connecting to Perplexity's secure cloud infrastructure. Perplexity positions Personal Computer as the next evolution in personal computing -- one where the machine doesn't just respond to commands but actively works toward user-defined goals across the full spectrum of digital tools. As AI agents continue to mature, Perplexity's hybrid approach -- combining local access for privacy and speed with cloud-scale intelligence -- could appeal to power users seeking more autonomous productivity without sacrificing control. MacDailyNews Note: For more details or to access the download, visit Perplexity's Personal Computer for Mac page here. Please help support MacDailyNews -- and enjoy subscriber-only articles, comments, chat, and more -- by subscribing to our Substack: macdailynews.substack.com. Thank you!
Anthropic releases Claude Opus 4.7: How to try it, benchmarks, safety
Anthropic has been shipping products and making news at a blistering pace in 2026, and on Thursday, the AI company announced the launch of Claude Opus 4.7. Claude Opus 4.7 is Anthropic's most intelligent model available to the general public. Notably, Anthropic said in a press release that Opus 4.7 is not as powerful as Claude Mythos, which Anthropic deemed too dangerous for public release. Claude Opus is a family of hybrid reasoning models capable of multi-step reasoning and advanced coding. Until the announcement of Claude Mythos on April 7, Claude Opus was considered Anthropic's most advanced series of AI models. Don't miss out on our latest stories: Add Mashable as a trusted news source in Google. Claude Opus 4.7 is available now via Claude AI, the Claude API, and Anthropic partners such as Microsoft Foundry. The new model is priced the same as Claude Opus 4.6. However, Anthropic noted that because "Opus 4.7 thinks more at higher effort levels," it uses more ouput tokens than its predecessor. Users can read more about how to optimize token usage in the Opus 4.7 migration guide. As expected, Claude Opus 4.7 offers improved capabilities across the board. In particular, Anthropic says Claude Opus 4.7 is better at advanced coding tasks, visual intelligence, and document analysis. Anthropic also says Opus 4.7 is "more tasteful and creative when completing professional tasks, producing higher-quality interfaces, slides, and docs." "Users report being able to hand off their hardest coding work -- the kind that previously needed close supervision -- to Opus 4.7 with confidence. Opus 4.7 handles complex, long-running tasks with rigor and consistency, pays precise attention to instructions, and devises ways to verify its own outputs before reporting back," reads an Anthropic blog post. Anthropic released a detailed model card outlining how Claude Opus 4.7 compares to other Anthropic models and frontier models from OpenAI, Google, and xAI. Opus 4.7 lags behind the unreleased Claude Mythos, which Anthropic reports scores significantly higher on common benchmarks such as Humanity's Last Exam. "Claude Opus 4.7 is less capable than Claude Mythos Preview on every relevant axis we measured and does not advance our capability frontier," the model card states." That means Claude Opus 4.7 is not evidence that AI development has accelerated beyond existing trend lines. On Humanity's Last Exam (without tools), Anthropic reports that Claude Opus 4.7 outperforms all other frontier models except Claude Mythos. With tools, GPT-5-4-Pro scored 58.7 percent compared to Opus 4.7's 54.7 percent. Mythos beat them both with 64.7 percent. Mashable has not independently verified these benchmark results. Full results are available in the Opus 4.7 model card. Overall, Anthropic scored Opus 4.7 above other leading models in some benchmarks, though Gemini 3.1 Pro and GPT-5-4 score higher in some areas. Anthropic also reports that Opus 4.7 shows a low risk of misaligned behaviors, with a similar risk profile as Opus 4.6. For example, Anthropic says Opus 4.7 is less likely to hallucinate and shows lower rates of reward hacking. "Claude Opus 4.7 is more reliably honest than Opus 4.6 or Sonnet 4.6, with large reductions in the rate of important omissions, and moderate improvements in factuality and rates of hallucinated input," the model card states.
Claude is requiring some of its users to verify their identity. Here's Anthropic's explanation.
An Anthropic spokesperson wrote that ID verification will be used when it sees "potentially fraudulent or abusive behavior." Anthropic recently added "identity verification" to its safeguards, requiring some users to provide a passport, driver's license, or government ID, along with a live selfie. The company is rolling it out for "a few use cases," according to its Help Center. Anthropic says it's the "data controller," setting the rules for where ID data is used and how long it is kept. But Persona Identities, an ID verification startup, will collect and store the user information. Persona is contractually obligated to employ user data "only to provide and support verification and to improve their ability to prevent fraud," Anthropic said. So why is Anthropic asking some Claude users to prove who they are? "This applies to a small number of cases where we see activity that indicates potentially fraudulent or abusive behavior, which violates our usage policy," an Anthropic spokesperson wrote to Business Insider. If Anthropic deems that the activity violates its usage policy, the Claude user's account could be banned. Anthropic's help page lists the following potential reasons for why an account might be banned after completing ID verification: Anthropic also offers an appeals form that can be filled out if a user feels their account has been wrongfully banned. Claude users on X have already started noticing the requests for an ID. One user posted a screenshot of the request in Claude, which asked for a "quick identity check." It wrote that the request would only take two minutes and required an ID and mobile camera access. Another screenshot posted online shows what it looks like once the process is completed. "Thank you for verifying your identity," it wrote, accompanied by a celebratory graphic. The backlash on X was swift. "Anthropic making unexplainable decisions," one user wrote. "We are living in 1984," another wrote. In its Help Center, Anthropic also included a list of things it was not doing. Anthropic was not training its models on the data from ID verifications, it wrote. It also wrote that it wasn't sharing ID data with anyone beyond Anthropic and Persona, except where legally required. "We are not collecting more than we need," Anthropic wrote. "We ask for the minimum information required to verify your identity."
SpaceX To Showcase California, Texas Hubs To Win Over IPO Backers
Elon Musk's SpaceX is reportedly showing potential anchor investors its facilities in California, Mississippi, and Texas as the company gears up for its initial public offering (IPO). Earlier this month, SpaceX submitted a draft initial public offering registration to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The company is now targeting a May listing with a valuation of more than $1.75 trillion making it the largest IPO in history, surpassing Saudi Aramco's $29 billion debut in 2019. The offering is expected to price the week of June 15, Bloomberg reported. SpaceX will be offering this tour across America for large stakes investors such as sovereign wealth funds. The plane is set to depart from New York, although plans and dates are subject to change, uncited sources told Bloomberg. According to previous reports, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase and Morgan Stanley have all secured senior roles on the deal. Citigroup is also among the banks preparing the IPO. International banks are also taking part in the process. Royal Bank of Canada, Mizuho Financial Group and Macquarie Group are all focused on managing shares from their respective locations. SpaceX Chief Financial Officer Bret Johnson reminded bankers working on the IPO process not to reveal confidential information to the public. Johnson noted he is "unhappy" about the leaks that have been released to the media regarding the company's IPO plans. In December, SpaceX notified its employees via an internal email that it would be entering a regulatory quiet period, which is a legally restricted timeframe surrounding a company's registration of new securities, such as an IPO. The quiet period requires employees to refrain from making any public statements about the company's IPO plans, including its valuation or growth prospects. This restriction applies across all channels, including social media, interviews, conferences, and public appearances. Photo: Thrive Studios ID via Shutterstock Market News and Data brought to you by Benzinga APIs To add Benzinga News as your preferred source on Google, click here.
Anthropic's Mythos AI tool could spark 'systemic financial market disruption,' a trade group warns
Consequences could range from mass identity theft to "systemic financial market disruption," it said. Anthropic's newest AI tool could spark chaos in markets, but not for the reasons investors have become accustomed to lately. The AI giant -- which has rolled out new tools and updates this year that have upended parts of the market -- recently developed a new model aimed at improving cybersecurity. But the model risks exploiting a key vulnerability in the financial sector, introducing risks ranging from widespread identity theft to the destabilization of the financial system, the American Securities Association said. In a public letter to the Treasury Secretary on Thursday, the trade group flagged concerns about Claude Mythos, the "general-purpose" AI model Anthropic announced in early April. The model -- which falls under Project Glasswing, the company's broader cybersecurity initiative -- is able to locate "thousands of high-severity vulnerabilities" in code across "every major operating system and web browser," the company said on its website. If used by bad actors, the tool could be used to hack into the Securities and Exchange Commission's Consolidated Audit Trail, a centralized database that contains investors' private information, the ASA speculated. The group's letter comes about a week after reports said that Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell convened major US bank CEOs for an urgent meeting to flag the cyber risks posed by Mythos. "The subject matter of this meeting confirms what ASA has warned about for years: the US Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) Consolidated Audit Trail (CAT) is a significant cybersecurity vulnerability waiting to be exploited. This is no longer a hypothetical. The threat is here, it is identified, and it has a name," the letter said, referring to Mythos. The ASA has long opposed the use of the Consolidated Audit Trail, citing data privacy concerns. The group outlined six specific risks it believes Mythos could pose to investors. The group outlined actions regulators could take, including suspending CAT and getting rid of the platform's collected data. Anthropic, which described Mythos as a work in progress on its website, also noted the potential consequences of the technology if it were used by bad actors. "Given the rate of AI progress, it will not be long before such capabilities proliferate, potentially beyond actors who are committed to deploying them safely. The fallout -- for economies, public safety, and national security -- could be severe," it said on its website. Anthropic and the US Treasury did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.
Starlink User Growth Accelerates as SpaceX Eyes Public Market Debut, Report Says
A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket lifts off from the Cape Canaveral Space Force Station with a payload of Starlink v2-mini satellites in Cape Canaveral, Florida, U.S., April 2, 2026. (REUTERS/Steve Nesius) Starlink, the satellite internet unit of Elon Musk's SpaceX, is seeing a surge in global user growth and app downloads, market research firm Apptopia said in a report, highlighting its role in supporting the parent's expected listing this summer. Global downloads of the Starlink app and monthly active users more than doubled in the first quarter from a year earlier. The service has now delivered four consecutive quarters of MAU growth above 100%, the report said on Thursday. SpaceX is expected to go public later this year and investor expectations for the listing hinge heavily on Starlink, seen as the primary driver of the company's targeted valuation of around $1.75 trillion. The business generated an estimated $11.4 billion in revenue last year, the report said. The expansion is being driven by both emerging and mature markets. Brazil recorded one of the fastest growth rates, with MAUs jumping roughly over fivefold from the year earlier. It accounts for about 13% of the global user base, up sharply from less than 5% a year ago. Argentina posted user growth of 159%. Together, the two markets represent more than a fifth of global active users. The U.S., Starlink's largest and highest-margin market, also showed strong momentum. App downloads in the country more than tripled year-over-year to a record 1.2 million in the January-March quarter, indicating an acceleration in subscriber acquisition. The combined strength in both emerging and developed markets suggests Starlink remains in a high-growth phase, after its subscriber base breached the 10-million mark in February. Continued subscriber growth will be key, according to analysts, with public market investors looking at future expansion opportunities, including SpaceX's plans to develop orbital data centers as the next phase of growth for its business. --
Amazon backed nuclear startup X-Energy to raise up to $800 million in IPO
Amazon-backed X-Energy is targeting a valuation of up to $7.51 billion in its initial public offering in the United States, according to the company. The IPO roadshow launch coincides with the S&P 500 reaching record closing highs, driven by strong corporate earnings and optimism in U.S.-Iran negotiations. "We've seen the IPO window slam shut before, so when companies see an opportunity, they take it," said Matt Kennedy, senior strategist at Renaissance Capital, a provider of IPO-focused research and ETFs. Amazon is one of X-Energy's biggest backers, with the tech giant leading a $500 million Series C-1 round and pledging to buy as much as 5 gigawatts of nuclear power from the company by 2039. READ: Amazon to buy Globalstar for $11.57 billion to expand satellite network (April 14, 2026) The IPO is bound to come as a relief to X-Energy's investors, who have invested about $1.8 billion into the company, according to PitchBook. The company had previously tried to go public via a reverse merger with a special purpose acquisition company, but this deal got cancelled in 2023. X-Energy's reactor is what's known as a high-temperature, gas-cooled reactor. It has uranium inside, encased in spheres of ceramic and carbon is cooled by helium gas. The gas then transfers heat to a steam turbine loop to generate electricity. The fuel design, known as TRISO, is expected to be safer than previous fuel arrangements, though it's not widely used today. X-Energy expects that by the time its reactor production techniques are mature -- what experts call "Nth-of-a-kind" -- it will be able to bring costs down by 30% relative to the first-of-a-kind. X-Energy said in its SEC filing that it's already embroiled in a patent dispute with another company that recently went bankrupt. Ultra Safe Nuclear Corporation (USNC) went bankrupt in 2024, and its assets were purchased in bankruptcy to form Standard Nuclear. READ: Amazon rolls out one-hour and three-hour shipping services in US (March 17, 2026) X-Energy claims that USNC infringed on its fuel fabrication patents and that the matter hasn't been resolved to its satisfaction during the course of the bankruptcy proceedings. This comes during a time when tech companies are taking an increasing interest in nuclear companies, as they seek out energy sources to power AI data centers. Morgan Stanley reports global electricity demand is projected to rise more than 1 trillion kWh annually through 2030, with data centers anticipated to contribute nearly 20% of this growth. Cathie Wood's ARK Investment Management and its affiliated entities have indicated an interest in purchasing up to $105 million of shares from X-Energy's offering. J.P. Morgan, Morgan Stanley, Jefferies, and Moelis are acting as the lead joint book-running managers. X‑Energy will list on the Nasdaq under the symbol "XE".
Europe could run out of jet fuel in 6 weeks -- throwing flights into chaos in time for summer
Europe has "maybe six weeks or so" of jet fuel left before it's forced to start canceling flights, if oil supplies remain blocked by the Iran war -- just in time for summer vacation, the head of the International Energy Agency warned on Thursday. IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol described the current situation as "the largest energy crisis we have ever faced" -- as he called for the Strait of Hormuz to reopen and allow global oil and gas supplies to flow. "Several European countries may start to face shortages of jet fuel in the next six weeks," Birol told the Associated Press. "If we are not able to open the Strait of Hormuz ... I can tell you soon we will hear the news that some of the flights from city A to city B might be canceled as a result of lack of jet fuel," he added The IEA's April report said Europe could start seeing physical shortages of jet fuel by June, even if the region can replace half of the supplies it normally gets from the Middle East. The continent has the highest dependence on jet fuel from the Middle East, with the region supplying nearly 375,000 bpd, or 75%, of Europe's net jet fuel imports, according to the IAE. "In the past, there was a group called 'Dire Straits.' It's a dire strait now, and it is going to have major implications for the global economy," Birol said. "And the longer it goes, the worse it will be for the economic growth and inflation around the world," he added. Birol's warning comes just a week after ACI Europe, which represents airports across the continent, suggested that Europe had only three weeks before it faced a serious fuel shortage. The fuel shortage is a direct result of Iran sealing off access to the Strait of Hormuz, a critical chokepoint that oversees the transport of 20% of the world's oil supply. Tehran shut down the strait in retaliation for the war, with the traffic of Iranian oil ships now also halted after the US issued its own naval blockade in the Gulf earlier this week. It remains unclear how long the Strait of Hormuz will remain closed after US-Iranian peace talks broke down over the weekend, while further negotiations remain tense.
Anthropic's Mythos AI tool could spark 'systemic financial market disruption,' trade group warns
Anthropic's newest AI tool could spark chaos in markets, but not for the reasons investors have become accustomed to lately. The AI giant -- which has rolled out new tools and updates this year that have upended parts of the market -- recently developed a new model aimed at improving cybersecurity. But the model risks exploiting a key vulnerability in the financial sector, introducing risks ranging from widespread identity theft to the destabilization of the financial system, the American Securities Association said. In a public letter to the Treasury Secretary on Thursday, the trade group flagged concerns about Claude Mythos, the "general-purpose" AI model Anthropic announced in early April. The model -- which falls under Project Glasswing, the company's broader cybersecurity initiative -- is able to locate "thousands of high-severity vulnerabilities" in code across "every major operating system and web browser," the company said on its website. If used by bad actors, the tool could be used to hack into the Securities and Exchange Commission's Consolidated Audit Trail, a centralized database that contains investors' private information, the ASA speculated. The group's letter comes about a week after reports said that Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell convened major US bank CEOs for an urgent meeting to flag the cyber risks posed by Mythos. "The subject matter of this meeting confirms what ASA has warned about for years: the US Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) Consolidated Audit Trail (CAT) is a significant cybersecurity vulnerability waiting to be exploited. This is no longer a hypothetical. The threat is here, it is identified, and it has a name," the letter said, referring to Mythos. The ASA has long opposed the use of the Consolidated Audit Trail, citing data privacy concerns. The group outlined six specific risks it believes Mythos could pose to investors. The group outlined actions regulators could take, including suspending CAT and getting rid of the platform's collected data. Anthropic, which described Mythos as a work in progress on its website, also noted the potential consequences of the technology if it were used by bad actors. "Given the rate of AI progress, it will not be long before such capabilities proliferate, potentially beyond actors who are committed to deploying them safely. The fallout -- for economies, public safety, and national security -- could be severe," it said on its website. Anthropic and the US Treasury did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.
Tesla Cybertruck sales were inflated by a SpaceX buying spree
Sales of Tesla Inc.'s Cybertruck have been propped up in recent months by Elon Musk's other companies, an unusual arrangement that further indicates the polarizing pickup is failing to appeal to everyday buyers. SpaceX, the Musk-led rocket and satellite maker, accounted for 1,279 -- or more than 18% -- of the 7,071 Cybertrucks registered in the US during the fourth quarter, according to registration data that S&P Global Mobility provided to Bloomberg News. The billionaire's other ventures acquired another 60 vehicles during those months. That means almost one in every five Cybertrucks registered during the period were delivered from one part of Musk's sprawling business empire to another. And the purchases, likely exceeding $100 million in value, have continued into this year. The figures reinforce the extent to which consumer demand is faltering only two years after Tesla began delivering the electric pickup. Without those sales to other Musk-run companies -- which included xAI, Boring Co. and Neuralink, in addition to SpaceX -- Cybertruck registrations in the fourth quarter would have fallen 51%. "Tesla is running out of buyers for the Cybertruck," said Sam Fiorani, vice president of global vehicle forecasting for advisory firm AutoForecast Solutions. Tesla, Musk, SpaceX, Boring and Neuralink didn't respond to requests for comment. SpaceX acquired xAI in February. Tesla is under increasing pressure to reverse slumping sales across its lineup as it faces the prospect of a third straight annual decline. Once the undisputed electric vehicle leader, the company was surpassed by China's BYD Co. as the world's top seller of EVs last year. Investors have largely overlooked Tesla's declining auto sales as Musk reorients the company around futuristic pursuits including robotaxis and humanoid robots. But those products are still a ways off from becoming tangible business lines, and shareholders' patience appears to be wearing thin. Since hitting a record high in mid-December, Tesla's stock has lost a fifth of its value. High Hopes The Cybertruck debuted with great fanfare in late 2023, diversifying Tesla's lineup as a rugged bruiser of a vehicle to counter the sleek Model Y SUV and Model 3 sedan that account for the vast majority of the company's auto sales. Tesla was keen to compete in the lucrative US pickup market dominated by Ford Motor Co., General Motors Co. and Stellantis NV. Musk predicted before the launch that the company would be churning out 250,000 Cybertrucks annually by 2025. He's called it the best product Tesla has ever made. From the outset, however, there were red flags. The Cybertruck's angular design was divisive, and the attention-grabbing vehicle occasionally became the target of ridicule and vandalism when a backlash against Musk swelled last year. The truck was also more expensive than expected, with initial versions fetching more than $100,000, far more than the under-$40,000 starting price tag first touted in 2019. The first Cybertruck registrations by SpaceX began in October of last year, according to S&P Global Mobility data. The sales to Musk-run companies have continued into 2026, with another 158 in January and 67 in February. While the financial terms of the inter-company sales haven't been disclosed, the Cybertruck's current starting price of around $70,000 suggests that SpaceX, xAI, Boring and Neuralink have paid Tesla more than $100 million combined for the vehicles. It's not entirely clear what Musk's other companies are doing with the Cybertrucks, or why an artificial intelligence and social media company would acquire 50 of them. Photos and videos have circulated online showing long rows of idle Cybertrucks on SpaceX property in Texas. The lead engineer for the pickup posted on social media in October that SpaceX was replacing gas-powered support vehicles with trucks. At least some are being used as security vehicles. EV news outlet Electrek reported in December that SpaceX could ultimately buy about 2,000 Cybertrucks. While Tesla has given no indication that it would discontinue the Cybertruck, it's phasing out the slow-selling Model X SUV and Model S sedan, its two oldest vehicles. Musk has indicated the company may look to boost fleet sales to commercial customers in response to questions about Cybertruck's murky prospects. "There's obviously a market there for cargo delivery," he said in January during a Tesla earnings call. "There's a lot of cargo that needs to move locally within a city, and an autonomous Cybertruck could be very useful for that." Pickup Letdown The sales woes aren't entirely unique to Cybertruck: electric pickups have been a bust within the broadly stalled US EV market. Ford recently decided to convert its electric F-150 Lightning pickup to an extended-range hybrid vehicle. The Cybertruck was still the top-selling battery-powered truck in the US during the first quarter, despite a 45% drop, according to Cox Automotive data. Musk's companies have long been intertwined through financial investments, business agreements and sometimes even shared personnel. XAI uses Tesla Megapack batteries and has integrated its Grok chatbot into Tesla vehicles; Las Vegas conference-goers can ride in Teslas through a Boring-built tunnel; Tesla and SpaceX are collaborating on a planned chip production project. Still, it's unusual for an automaker to unload significant volumes of a single model to an affiliated business with the same CEO. Car manufacturers will sometimes offer new incentives, lower prices or lease vehicles to employees when a model isn't selling well. "It's a way of keeping the plant running when retail demand does not equal production," said Tom Libby, an automotive analyst at S&P Global Mobility.
'Credit Card Chaos'? Financial Institutions Bet Big on Repeal of First-Of-Its-Kind Illinois Law
"Credit cards may not work for sales tax or tips starting July 1." By now, you've heard that claim, but whether it's true depends on who you ask. The ads -- funded by the Electronic Payments Coalition of banks, credit unions and card companies -- argue that Illinois lawmakers must repeal the state's first-in-the-nation Interchange Fee Prohibition Act, slated to take effect July 1. That law prohibits financial institutions from charging "swipe," or interchange, fees on the tax and tip portions of consumer bills and bans them from making up the fees elsewhere. If it's not repealed? "Credit card chaos" may ensue, the ads warn. While the financial institutions are quick to cite a list of things that could hypothetically happen if the law isn't repealed, it's harder to pin down what's being done and by who to comply with the law two years after it was signed. "The global payment system is not set up to where any one party to a transaction can make this happen on their own," Ashley Sharp, of the Illinois Credit Union Association said at a Capitol news conference Wednesday. "There are multiple parties to every electronic transaction." The financial institutions are adamant that the global payment system as it exists today can't discern the difference between tax, tips and total, and it would need to be retooled at a heavy cost to banks, card companies, merchants, point-of-sale companies and more. Instead of complying, they say, the card companies could decide to stop serving Illinois or drastically alter the way the consumer interacts with merchants at the point of sale. An alternate reality But as with all matters in Springfield, there's another big-monied and powerful group on the other side of the issue. The Illinois Retail Merchants Association says the credit card companies already track all the information they need, and it's a "complete fabrication" to say that it would take more than a mere coding change to implement the state law. Take your restaurant receipt, for example. "You have the subtotal, the sales tax, the tip, if it's applicable, and then the grand total, right? All they have to do is move their fee from the grand total to the subtotal," Rob Karr, president of IRMA, said. While card networks operate in over 200 countries with as many different laws, they say the only information the card processors ask for in any of them is the grand total. The receipt example, they say, erroneously conflates the point of sale with the actual processing of payments. In short, the two sides present starkly different realities -- a muddying of the water that's not uncommon at the Capitol. But there is one concrete truth: The financial institutions have a lot to lose, and not just in Illinois. The tax and tip prohibition would shave approximately 10% off the revenue that banks and credit unions receive from retailers via interchange fees -- a transfer of wealth likely to number in the hundreds of millions. It would also create massive noncompliance fines. And then there's the issue of precedent. The banks challenged the law but lost in court. Absent a successful appeal, the remaining battlefields would be other state legislatures. If the card companies implement Illinois' law, they'd be providing a blueprint for states across the nation to emulate -- driving potential revenue loss into the billions. Thus far, Ben Jackson of the Illinois Bankers Association said, it hasn't opened the floodgates, although some 30 states are considering similar action. Still, it's no wonder then, that the Electronic Payments Coalition has pulled out all the stops in its seven-figure ad campaign to repeal the law. How we got here To fully understand the ongoing slugfest between banks and retailers, you have to go back to May 2024. But first, an explanation of interchange fees. Each time a shopper swipes their credit or debit card, it sets off a complicated string of payments between banks. The retailer's bank pays an "interchange fee," typically around 1% to 2% of the transaction cost, to the consumer's bank. The fees include both a set amount and a percentage of the transaction, but the credit card companies, namely Visa and Mastercard, control how they're calculated. The financial institutions say interchange fees help fund credit card reward programs and security upgrades and provide compensation for bearing the risk of fraud. The hit to interchange revenue, Jackson said, would inevitably lessen reward program offerings. Sharp said credit unions, as not-for-profit cooperatives, use the revenue to offer lower rates to customers. But the fees have long drawn the ire of retailers and small businesses, which sometimes pass the costs directly to consumers via a surcharge on bills. It comes down to this: The retailers don't think they should have to pay a fee on the tax and tip portion of a transaction that they don't keep. And the financial institutions say if they're handling those funds, they should be compensated for doing so via interchange fees. As for the Illinois law's passage, it was, as the ads claim, tucked into the budget two years ago, giving little time for the bankers et al to mount an opposition campaign. Gov. JB Pritzker and lawmakers agreed to raise about $101 million in revenue to plug a budget hole by putting a $1,000 monthly cap on the "retailer's exemption," a tax break retailers claim for being the state's de facto sales tax collectors. But the retailers weren't going to take that lying down, and IRMA successfully lobbied for the long-sought tax and tip exemption. After the law passed, the financial institutions quickly sued. To avoid uncertainty as the case played out, lawmakers delayed the measure's effective date from July 1 last year to the same date this year. U.S. District Judge Virginia Kendall ultimately determined in February that Illinois is within its right to regulate the fees. She partially rejected a portion of the law that prohibited banks from sharing certain data, which the credit unions say creates different rules for different institutions and further uncertainty. The case is now pending appeal, and the legislative process is starting anew. This time, the financial institutions have mounted a dual front in the court of public opinion. The cost of compliance Karr estimated the prohibition would bring in "north of $200 million" for retailers -- essentially letting them pocket that sum instead of transferring it to the banks. A study by the Electronic Payments Coalition pegged the number at $118 million, estimating that about 40% of the interchange windfall would go to the 40 largest retailers. Even so, Karr said, the largest retailers are subject to the $1,000 monthly retailer exemption cap that accompanied the swipe fee ban, while smaller retailers don't reach that mark. Add in their cut on reimbursed swipe fees, and it amounts to what Karr calls "the largest small business relief that Illinois has ever passed." But Jackson argued the cost of retailers complying could eat up any benefits for smaller retailers. As for compliance, Kendall wrote in her February opinion that "It is an open question whether the transaction process could adapt to the impact of the IFPA in time." "The Interchange Fee Provision is indisputably disruptive, requiring additional investments, hires, and new procedures to replace the current process for authorizing and settling debit and credit card transactions," she wrote. The financial institutions argue it can't all be done by July 1. Kendall said the parties involved know what's required of them. "But those procedural changes are the product of an ecosystem built by Payment Card Networks and financial institutions to facilitate consumer transactions," she wrote. "And these entities understand the onus of IFPA compliance is on them." Per the coalition, compliance "would require coordination across the industry and regulators worldwide," including with the International Organization for Standardization. It would also require more data collection, creating privacy concerns, they say. Those global changes would require testing and certification of new equipment. Depending on their card companies or point-of-sale vendors, retailers may need to invest in new equipment, software and training. Banks and credit unions may also have to add staff to process rebates under the law. It allows retailers or their processing companies to petition their financial institutions for reimbursement on fees charged on tax and tips within 180 days of a transaction. If financial institutions don't comply within 30 days, the law provides for civil penalties of $1,000 per each transaction -- and hundreds of millions of these transactions happen annually. So will that chaos come to fruition? Instead of complying, according to the coalition's literature, the card companies could just stop processing cards altogether in Illinois. They could also stop processing tax and tip portions or require two separate swipes for the subtotal and the tax and tip portion of bills. Such claims aren't uncommon in the legislature's annual adjournment push. Sports betting companies, for example, threatened to leave Illinois when the state raised its gambling taxes in the same budget cycle that yielded the interchange fee prohibition two years ago. Instead, they adapted, because Illinois has a lot of bettors -- and there's even more card users. Karr accused the coalition of ulterior motives in their use of hypothetical language. "There is no need for chaos," he said. "The only chaos is if the credit card companies impose it themselves on their consumers." Ultimately, lawmakers will have to weigh how compelling the arguments are, if the courts don't intervene first. It's possible that the 7th Circuit appellate court -- or even the U.S. Supreme Court -- gives the banks a win. But oral arguments are slated for May 13, meaning the appellate court might not rule by the time the law is slated to take effect. Adding a new wrinkle on Wednesday, the federal office of the Comptroller of the Currency, a subset of the U.S. Treasury Department, appeared poised to issue an order preempting Illinois' law. It hadn't been published as of late Wednesday, making its impact unclear. "While the office has failed to explain their reasoning or allow public review, it's clear the goal is an end-run around the legal process after a judge recently upheld the law," Karr said. As for the legislative prospects, state Rep. Margaret Croke, D-Chicago, says she's seen enough to be concerned. The Democratic nominee for comptroller is sponsoring a bill to fully repeal Illinois' interchange fee prohibition. But as of last week, she said she wasn't planning to move it. Instead, she finds it more likely that lawmakers once again delay the law's implementation. "If this is a policy that the state of Illinois decides they're going to want to have, then we need to make sure we're doing it properly," she said. ___ This story was originally published by Capitol News Illinois and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.
'Credit card chaos'? Financial institutions bet big on repeal of first-of-its-kind Illinois law
"Credit cards may not work for sales tax or tips starting July 1." By now, you've heard that claim, but whether it's true depends on who you ask. The ads -- funded by the Electronic Payments Coalition of banks, credit unions and card companies -- argue that Illinois lawmakers must repeal the state's first-in-the-nation Interchange Fee Prohibition Act, slated to take effect July 1. That law prohibits financial institutions from charging "swipe," or interchange, fees on the tax and tip portions of consumer bills and bans them from making up the fees elsewhere. If it's not repealed? "Credit card chaos" may ensue, the ads warn. While the financial institutions are quick to cite a list of things that could hypothetically happen if the law isn't repealed, it's harder to pin down what's being done and by who to comply with the law two years after it was signed. "The global payment system is not set up to where any one party to a transaction can make this happen on their own," Ashley Sharp, of the Illinois Credit Union Association said at a Capitol news conference Wednesday. "There are multiple parties to every electronic transaction." The financial institutions are adamant that the global payment system as it exists today can't discern the difference between tax, tips and total, and it would need to be retooled at a heavy cost to banks, card companies, merchants, point-of-sale companies and more. Instead of complying, they say, the card companies could decide to stop serving Illinois or drastically alter the way the consumer interacts with merchants at the point of sale. An alternate reality But as with all matters in Springfield, there's another big-monied and powerful group on the other side of the issue. The Illinois Retail Merchants Association says the credit card companies already track all the information they need, and it's a "complete fabrication" to say that it would take more than a mere coding change to implement the state law. Take your restaurant receipt, for example. "You have the subtotal, the sales tax, the tip, if it's applicable, and then the grand total, right? All they have to do is move their fee from the grand total to the subtotal," Rob Karr, president of IRMA, said. While card networks operate in over 200 countries with as many different laws, they say the only information the card processors ask for in any of them is the grand total. The receipt example, they say, erroneously conflates the point of sale with the actual processing of payments. In short, the two sides present starkly different realities -- a muddying of the water that's not uncommon at the Capitol. But there is one concrete truth: The financial institutions have a lot to lose, and not just in Illinois. The tax and tip prohibition would shave approximately 10% off the revenue that banks and credit unions receive from retailers via interchange fees -- a transfer of wealth likely to number in the hundreds of millions. It would also create massive noncompliance fines. And then there's the issue of precedent. The banks challenged the law but lost in court. Absent a successful appeal, the remaining battlefields would be other state legislatures. If the card companies implement Illinois' law, they'd be providing a blueprint for states across the nation to emulate -- driving potential revenue loss into the billions. Thus far, Ben Jackson of the Illinois Bankers Association said, it hasn't opened the floodgates, although some 30 states are considering similar action. Still, it's no wonder then, that the Electronic Payments Coalition has pulled out all the stops in its seven-figure ad campaign to repeal the law. How we got here To fully understand the ongoing slugfest between banks and retailers, you have to go back to May 2024. But first, an explanation of interchange fees. Each time a shopper swipes their credit or debit card, it sets off a complicated string of payments between banks. The retailer's bank pays an "interchange fee," typically around 1% to 2% of the transaction cost, to the consumer's bank. The fees include both a set amount and a percentage of the transaction, but the credit card companies, namely Visa and Mastercard, control how they're calculated. The financial institutions say interchange fees help fund credit card reward programs and security upgrades and provide compensation for bearing the risk of fraud. The hit to interchange revenue, Jackson said, would inevitably lessen reward program offerings. Sharp said credit unions, as not-for-profit cooperatives, use the revenue to offer lower rates to customers. But the fees have long drawn the ire of retailers and small businesses, which sometimes pass the costs directly to consumers via a surcharge on bills. It comes down to this: The retailers don't think they should have to pay a fee on the tax and tip portion of a transaction that they don't keep. And the financial institutions say if they're handling those funds, they should be compensated for doing so via interchange fees. As for the Illinois law's passage, it was, as the ads claim, tucked into the budget two years ago, giving little time for the bankers et al to mount an opposition campaign. Gov. JB Pritzker and lawmakers agreed to raise about $101 million in revenue to plug a budget hole by putting a $1,000 monthly cap on the "retailer's exemption," a tax break retailers claim for being the state's de facto sales tax collectors. But the retailers weren't going to take that lying down, and IRMA successfully lobbied for the long-sought tax and tip exemption. After the law passed, the financial institutions quickly sued. To avoid uncertainty as the case played out, lawmakers delayed the measure's effective date from July 1 last year to the same date this year. U.S. District Judge Virginia Kendall ultimately determined in February that Illinois is within its right to regulate the fees. She partially rejected a portion of the law that prohibited banks from sharing certain data, which the credit unions say creates different rules for different institutions and further uncertainty. The case is now pending appeal, and the legislative process is starting anew. This time, the financial institutions have mounted a dual front in the court of public opinion. The cost of compliance Karr estimated the prohibition would bring in "north of $200 million" for retailers -- essentially letting them pocket that sum instead of transferring it to the banks. A study by the Electronic Payments Coalition pegged the number at $118 million, estimating that about 40% of the interchange windfall would go to the 40 largest retailers. Even so, Karr said, the largest retailers are subject to the $1,000 monthly retailer exemption cap that accompanied the swipe fee ban, while smaller retailers don't reach that mark. Add in their cut on reimbursed swipe fees, and it amounts to what Karr calls "the largest small business relief that Illinois has ever passed." But Jackson argued the cost of retailers complying could eat up any benefits for smaller retailers. As for compliance, Kendall wrote in her February opinion that "It is an open question whether the transaction process could adapt to the impact of the IFPA in time." "The Interchange Fee Provision is indisputably disruptive, requiring additional investments, hires, and new procedures to replace the current process for authorizing and settling debit and credit card transactions," she wrote. The financial institutions argue it can't all be done by July 1. Kendall said the parties involved know what's required of them. "But those procedural changes are the product of an ecosystem built by Payment Card Networks and financial institutions to facilitate consumer transactions," she wrote. "And these entities understand the onus of IFPA compliance is on them." Per the coalition, compliance "would require coordination across the industry and regulators worldwide," including with the International Organization for Standardization. It would also require more data collection, creating privacy concerns, they say. Those global changes would require testing and certification of new equipment. Depending on their card companies or point-of-sale vendors, retailers may need to invest in new equipment, software and training. Banks and credit unions may also have to add staff to process rebates under the law. It allows retailers or their processing companies to petition their financial institutions for reimbursement on fees charged on tax and tips within 180 days of a transaction. If financial institutions don't comply within 30 days, the law provides for civil penalties of $1,000 per each transaction -- and hundreds of millions of these transactions happen annually. So will that chaos come to fruition? Instead of complying, according to the coalition's literature, the card companies could just stop processing cards altogether in Illinois. They could also stop processing tax and tip portions or require two separate swipes for the subtotal and the tax and tip portion of bills. Such claims aren't uncommon in the legislature's annual adjournment push. Sports betting companies, for example, threatened to leave Illinois when the state raised its gambling taxes in the same budget cycle that yielded the interchange fee prohibition two years ago. Instead, they adapted, because Illinois has a lot of bettors -- and there's even more card users. Karr accused the coalition of ulterior motives in their use of hypothetical language. "There is no need for chaos," he said. "The only chaos is if the credit card companies impose it themselves on their consumers." Ultimately, lawmakers will have to weigh how compelling the arguments are, if the courts don't intervene first. It's possible that the 7th Circuit appellate court -- or even the U.S. Supreme Court -- gives the banks a win. But oral arguments are slated for May 13, meaning the appellate court might not rule by the time the law is slated to take effect. Adding a new wrinkle on Wednesday, the federal office of the Comptroller of the Currency, a subset of the U.S. Treasury Department, appeared poised to issue an order preempting Illinois' law. It hadn't been published as of late Wednesday, making its impact unclear. "While the office has failed to explain their reasoning or allow public review, it's clear the goal is an end-run around the legal process after a judge recently upheld the law," Karr said. As for the legislative prospects, state Rep. Margaret Croke, D-Chicago, says she's seen enough to be concerned. The Democratic nominee for comptroller is sponsoring a bill to fully repeal Illinois' interchange fee prohibition. But as of last week, she said she wasn't planning to move it. Instead, she finds it more likely that lawmakers once again delay the law's implementation. "If this is a policy that the state of Illinois decides they're going to want to have, then we need to make sure we're doing it properly," she said. This story was originally published by Capitol News Illinois and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.
Starlink outage hit drone tests, exposing Pentagon's growing reliance on SpaceX
The Pentagon, seen from the air in Washington. (Josh Roberts/Reuters) Last August, U.S. Navy officials carrying out a test of unmanned vessels realized they had hit a single point of failure: Starlink. A global outage across Elon Musk's satellite network affecting millions of Starlink users had left two dozen unmanned surface vessels bobbing off the California coast, disrupting communications and halting operations for almost an hour. The incident, which involved drones intended to bolster U.S. military options in a conflict with China, was one of several Navy test disruptions linked to SpaceX's Starlink that left operators unable to connect with autonomous boats, according to internal Navy documents reviewed by Reuters and a person familiar with the matter. As SpaceX rockets toward a $2 trillion public offering this summer - expected to be the largest ever - the company has secured its position as the world's most valuable space company in part by being indispensable to the U.S. government with an array of technologies spanning satellite communications to space launches and military AI. Starlink, in particular, has proved key to crucial programs - from drones to missile tracking - with a low-earth orbit constellation of close to 10,000 satellites, a scale that provides the military with a network resilient against potential adversary attacks. But the Navy's mishaps with Starlink for its autonomous drone program, which have not been previously reported, highlight the challenges of the U.S. military's growing reliance on SpaceX and the risks it brings to the Pentagon. "If there was no Starlink, the U.S. government wouldn't have access to a global constellation of low earth orbit communications," said Clayton Swope, a deputy director of the Aerospace Security Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. The Pentagon did not respond to questions about the drone test or SpaceX's work with the Navy. The Pentagon's chief information officer, Kirsten Davies, said the "Department leverages multiple, robust, resilient systems for its broad network." The Navy and SpaceX did not respond to requests for comment. Despite facing growing competition from Amazon.com, which announced an $11.6 billion agreement this week to acquire satellite maker Globalstar, SpaceX remains far ahead in low-earth orbit communications. Beyond drones, SpaceX has cemented a near-monopoly for space launches and provides satellite communications with Starlink and its national security-focused constellation, Starshield, generating billions of dollars for the company. Last month, U.S. Space Force said it had reassigned its upcoming GPS launch to a SpaceX rocket for the fourth time, due to a glitch in the Vulcan rocket made by the Boeing and Lockheed Martin joint venture United Launch Alliance. WARNINGS ABOUT RELYING ON SPACEX Democratic lawmakers have warned the Pentagon about the risks of its reliance on a single company led by the world's richest man to deliver crucial national security capabilities. More recently, the Defense Department's disagreements and blacklisting of AI startup Anthropic quickly revealed how an over-reliance on one AI vendor could create problems should that vendor be dropped. Reuters reported last year that Musk unexpectedly switched off Starlink access to Ukrainian troops as they sought to retake territory from Russia, denting allies' trust in the billionaire. In Taiwan, SpaceX faced criticism over concerns it was withholding satellite communications to U.S. service members based there, "possibly in breach of SpaceX's contractual obligations with the U.S. government," according to a 2024 letter sent by then-U.S. Representative Mike Gallagher to Musk, reported by Forbes at the time. SpaceX disputed the claim in a post on X. Reuters could not determine whether SpaceX has since provided Starlink service in Taiwan to U.S. service members. The Pentagon and SpaceX did not respond to questions about Taiwan. "As a matter of operational security, we do not comment on or discuss plans, operations capabilities or effects," an official said in a statement. STARLINK 'EXPOSED LIMITATIONS' SpaceX's Starlink broadband has been crucial to the Pentagon's drone program, providing connection to small unmanned maritime vessels that look like speedboats without seats, and include those made by Maryland-based BlackSea and Austin, Texas-based Saronic. In April 2025, during a series of Navy tests in California involving unmanned boats and flying drones, officials reported that Starlink struggled to provide a solid network connection due to the high data usage needed to control multiple systems, according to a Navy safety report of the tests reviewed by Reuters. "Starlink reliance exposed limitations under multiple-vehicle load," the report stated. The report also faulted issues linked to radios provided by Silvus and a network system provided by Viasat. In the weeks leading up to the global Starlink outage in August, another series of Navy tests was disrupted by intermittent connection issues with the Starlink network, Navy documents reviewed by Reuters show. The causes of the network losses were not immediately clear. Despite the setbacks, the upside of Starlink - a cheap and commercially available service - outweighs the risk of a potential outage disrupting future military operations, said Bryan Clark, an autonomous warfare expert at the Hudson Institute. "You accept those vulnerabilities because of the benefits you get from the ubiquity it provides," he said.
Tesla Cybertruck sales were inflated by a SpaceX buying spree
Sales of Tesla Inc.'s Cybertruck have been propped up in recent months by Elon Musk's other companies, an unusual arrangement that further indicates the polarizing pickup is failing to appeal to everyday buyers. SpaceX, the Musk-led rocket and satellite maker, accounted for 1,279 -- or more than 18% -- of the 7,071 Cybertrucks registered in the US during the fourth quarter, according to registration data that S&P Global Mobility provided to Bloomberg News. The billionaire's other ventures acquired another 60 vehicles during those months. That means almost one in every five Cybertrucks registered during the period were delivered from one part of Musk's sprawling business empire to another. And the purchases, likely exceeding $100 million in value, have continued into this year. The figures reinforce the extent to which consumer demand is faltering only two years after Tesla began delivering the electric pickup. Without those sales to other Musk-run companies -- which included xAI, Boring Co. and Neuralink, in addition to SpaceX -- Cybertruck registrations in the fourth quarter would have fallen 51%. "Tesla is running out of buyers for the Cybertruck," said Sam Fiorani, vice president of global vehicle forecasting for advisory firm AutoForecast Solutions. Tesla, Musk, SpaceX, Boring and Neuralink didn't respond to requests for comment. SpaceX acquired xAI in February. Tesla is under increasing pressure to reverse slumping sales across its lineup as it faces the prospect of a third straight annual decline. Once the undisputed electric vehicle leader, the company was surpassed by China's BYD Co. as the world's top seller of EVs last year. Investors have largely overlooked Tesla's declining auto sales as Musk reorients the company around futuristic pursuits including robotaxis and humanoid robots. But those products are still a ways off from becoming tangible business lines, and shareholders' patience appears to be wearing thin. Since hitting a record high in mid-December, Tesla's stock has lost a fifth of its value. High Hopes The Cybertruck debuted with great fanfare in late 2023, diversifying Tesla's lineup as a rugged bruiser of a vehicle to counter the sleek Model Y SUV and Model 3 sedan that account for the vast majority of the company's auto sales. Tesla was keen to compete in the lucrative US pickup market dominated by Ford Motor Co., General Motors Co. and Stellantis NV. Musk predicted before the launch that the company would be churning out 250,000 Cybertrucks annually by 2025. He's called it the best product Tesla has ever made. From the outset, however, there were red flags. The Cybertruck's angular design was divisive, and the attention-grabbing vehicle occasionally became the target of ridicule and vandalism when a backlash against Musk swelled last year. The truck was also more expensive than expected, with initial versions fetching more than $100,000, far more than the under-$40,000 starting price tag first touted in 2019. The first Cybertruck registrations by SpaceX began in October of last year, according to S&P Global Mobility data. The sales to Musk-run companies have continued into 2026, with another 158 in January and 67 in February. While the financial terms of the inter-company sales haven't been disclosed, the Cybertruck's current starting price of around $70,000 suggests that SpaceX, xAI, Boring and Neuralink have paid Tesla more than $100 million combined for the vehicles. It's not entirely clear what Musk's other companies are doing with the Cybertrucks, or why an artificial intelligence and social media company would acquire 50 of them. Photos and videos have circulated online showing long rows of idle Cybertrucks on SpaceX property in Texas. The lead engineer for the pickup posted on social media in October that SpaceX was replacing gas-powered support vehicles with trucks. At least some are being used as security vehicles. EV news outlet Electrek reported in December that SpaceX could ultimately buy about 2,000 Cybertrucks. While Tesla has given no indication that it would discontinue the Cybertruck, it's phasing out the slow-selling Model X SUV and Model S sedan, its two oldest vehicles. Musk has indicated the company may look to boost fleet sales to commercial customers in response to questions about Cybertruck's murky prospects. "There's obviously a market there for cargo delivery," he said in January during a Tesla earnings call. "There's a lot of cargo that needs to move locally within a city, and an autonomous Cybertruck could be very useful for that." Pickup Letdown The sales woes aren't entirely unique to Cybertruck: electric pickups have been a bust within the broadly stalled US EV market. Ford recently decided to convert its electric F-150 Lightning pickup to an extended-range hybrid vehicle. The Cybertruck was still the top-selling battery-powered truck in the US during the first quarter, despite a 45% drop, according to Cox Automotive data. Musk's companies have long been intertwined through financial investments, business agreements and sometimes even shared personnel. XAI uses Tesla Megapack batteries and has integrated its Grok chatbot into Tesla vehicles; Las Vegas conference-goers can ride in Teslas through a Boring-built tunnel; Tesla and SpaceX are collaborating on a planned chip production project. Still, it's unusual for an automaker to unload significant volumes of a single model to an affiliated business with the same CEO. Car manufacturers will sometimes offer new incentives, lower prices or lease vehicles to employees when a model isn't selling well. "It's a way of keeping the plant running when retail demand does not equal production," said Tom Libby, an automotive analyst at S&P Global Mobility.
White House Moves to Give US Agencies Anthropic Mythos Access
The US government is preparing to make a version of Anthropic PBC's powerful new artificial intelligence model available to major federal agencies amid concerns that the tool could sharply increase cybersecurity risk, according to a memo reviewed by Bloomberg News. Gregory Barbaccia, federal chief information officer of the White House Office of Management and Budget, told officials at Cabinet departments in an email Tuesday that OMB is setting up protections that would allow their agencies to begin using the closely guarded AI tool, Mythos. The email doesn't say definitively that the various agencies will get access to Mythos, nor does it provide a timeline for when it might come or how they might use it. It tells top technology and cybersecurity chiefs to expect more information "in the coming weeks." Anthropic has only provided Mythos to a limited group of technology companies, financial firms and others, urging them to use it to assess their cybersecurity risk. The firm limited the release of Mythos amid concerns that hackers could weaponize its capabilities to steal data or sabotage victim networks. Get the Tech Newsletter bundle. Get the Tech Newsletter bundle. Get the Tech Newsletter bundle. Bloomberg's subscriber-only tech newsletters, and full access to all the articles they feature. Bloomberg's subscriber-only tech newsletters, and full access to all the articles they feature. Bloomberg's subscriber-only tech newsletters, and full access to all the articles they feature. Plus Signed UpPlus Sign UpPlus Sign Up By continuing, I agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Service. Before its limited release of Mythos, Anthropic briefed senior officials across the US government on the model's full capabilities, including both its offensive and defensive cyber applications, according to a company official who spoke on condition that they not be identified discussing the talks with government. The talks included staff at the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency and the Center for AI Standards and Innovation, among others, the company official said, and Anthropic has continued to work with government on security issues arising from the model. Barbaccia's message was sent as leaders from Washington to Wall Street are grappling with the possibility that the model could make it dramatically easier for hackers to find ways to break into sensitive computer systems in industry and government. "We're working closely with model providers, other industry partners, and the intelligence community to ensure the appropriate guardrails and safeguards are in place before potentially releasing a modified version of the model to agencies," Barbaccia wrote in the email, which had the subject, "Mythos Model Access." A White House official said in an email that the government continues to work and engage with AI companies to ensure their models help secure critical software vulnerabilities. They didn't answer specific questions on the matter. Anthropic declined to comment. Neither Anthropic nor the government said what, if any, federal agencies have gotten early access to Mythos. Barbaccia's email went to officials with the Department of Defense, Department of Treasury, Department of Commerce, Department of Homeland Security, Department of Justice and Department of State, among several other agencies. The Treasury Department has been seeking access to Mythos in order to uncover its own software flaws, Bloomberg has reported. Within Anthropic, company leaders became worried the model could be a national security risk after testers were able to use Mythos to turn up the types of critical bugs that it would normally take the world's best hackers to uncover. These concerns prompted the company's limited release of the model. It's similarly set off alarms in various parts of the US government. Among officials focused on national defense, the introduction of Mythos has created profound uncertainty about how to evaluate cybersecurity risk, a person familiar with the matter previously told Bloomberg. Equipping an individual hacker with the model, or similar AI tools, would likely be a transformation equivalent to turning a conventional soldier into a special forces operator, the person said. On the day, Anthropic publicly disclosed Mythos' existence, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell convened Wall Street leaders for a meeting in Washington to urge them to use the model to find weaknesses in their own systems.
Tesla Cybertruck sales were inflated by a SpaceX buying spree
Sales of Tesla Inc.'s Cybertruck have been propped up in recent months by Elon Musk's other companies, an unusual arrangement that further indicates the polarizing pickup is failing to appeal to everyday buyers. SpaceX, the Musk-led rocket and satellite maker, accounted for 1,279 -- or more than 18% -- of the 7,071 Cybertrucks registered in the US during the fourth quarter, according to registration data that S&P Global Mobility provided to Bloomberg News. The billionaire's other ventures acquired another 60 vehicles during those months. That means almost one in every five Cybertrucks registered during the period were delivered from one part of Musk's sprawling business empire to another. And the purchases, likely exceeding $100 million in value, have continued into this year. The figures reinforce the extent to which consumer demand is faltering only two years after Tesla began delivering the electric pickup. Without those sales to other Musk-run companies -- which included xAI, Boring Co. and Neuralink, in addition to SpaceX -- Cybertruck registrations in the fourth quarter would have fallen 51%. "Tesla is running out of buyers for the Cybertruck," said Sam Fiorani, vice president of global vehicle forecasting for advisory firm AutoForecast Solutions. Tesla, Musk, SpaceX, Boring and Neuralink didn't respond to requests for comment. SpaceX acquired xAI in February. Tesla is under increasing pressure to reverse slumping sales across its lineup as it faces the prospect of a third straight annual decline. Once the undisputed electric vehicle leader, the company was surpassed by China's BYD Co. as the world's top seller of EVs last year. Investors have largely overlooked Tesla's declining auto sales as Musk reorients the company around futuristic pursuits including robotaxis and humanoid robots. But those products are still a ways off from becoming tangible business lines, and shareholders' patience appears to be wearing thin. Since hitting a record high in mid-December, Tesla's stock has lost a fifth of its value. High Hopes The Cybertruck debuted with great fanfare in late 2023, diversifying Tesla's lineup as a rugged bruiser of a vehicle to counter the sleek Model Y SUV and Model 3 sedan that account for the vast majority of the company's auto sales. Tesla was keen to compete in the lucrative US pickup market dominated by Ford Motor Co., General Motors Co. and Stellantis NV. Musk predicted before the launch that the company would be churning out 250,000 Cybertrucks annually by 2025. He's called it the best product Tesla has ever made. From the outset, however, there were red flags. The Cybertruck's angular design was divisive, and the attention-grabbing vehicle occasionally became the target of ridicule and vandalism when a backlash against Musk swelled last year. The truck was also more expensive than expected, with initial versions fetching more than $100,000, far more than the under-$40,000 starting price tag first touted in 2019. The first Cybertruck registrations by SpaceX began in October of last year, according to S&P Global Mobility data. The sales to Musk-run companies have continued into 2026, with another 158 in January and 67 in February. While the financial terms of the inter-company sales haven't been disclosed, the Cybertruck's current starting price of around $70,000 suggests that SpaceX, xAI, Boring and Neuralink have paid Tesla more than $100 million combined for the vehicles. It's not entirely clear what Musk's other companies are doing with the Cybertrucks, or why an artificial intelligence and social media company would acquire 50 of them. Photos and videos have circulated online showing long rows of idle Cybertrucks on SpaceX property in Texas. The lead engineer for the pickup posted on social media in October that SpaceX was replacing gas-powered support vehicles with trucks. At least some are being used as security vehicles. EV news outlet Electrek reported in December that SpaceX could ultimately buy about 2,000 Cybertrucks. While Tesla has given no indication that it would discontinue the Cybertruck, it's phasing out the slow-selling Model X SUV and Model S sedan, its two oldest vehicles. Musk has indicated the company may look to boost fleet sales to commercial customers in response to questions about Cybertruck's murky prospects. "There's obviously a market there for cargo delivery," he said in January during a Tesla earnings call. "There's a lot of cargo that needs to move locally within a city, and an autonomous Cybertruck could be very useful for that." Pickup Letdown The sales woes aren't entirely unique to Cybertruck: electric pickups have been a bust within the broadly stalled US EV market. Ford recently decided to convert its electric F-150 Lightning pickup to an extended-range hybrid vehicle. The Cybertruck was still the top-selling battery-powered truck in the US during the first quarter, despite a 45% drop, according to Cox Automotive data. Musk's companies have long been intertwined through financial investments, business agreements and sometimes even shared personnel. XAI uses Tesla Megapack batteries and has integrated its Grok chatbot into Tesla vehicles; Las Vegas conference-goers can ride in Teslas through a Boring-built tunnel; Tesla and SpaceX are collaborating on a planned chip production project. Still, it's unusual for an automaker to unload significant volumes of a single model to an affiliated business with the same CEO. Car manufacturers will sometimes offer new incentives, lower prices or lease vehicles to employees when a model isn't selling well. "It's a way of keeping the plant running when retail demand does not equal production," said Tom Libby, an automotive analyst at S&P Global Mobility.
Anthropic releases Claude Opus 4.7, resolving prediction markets
The April 16 market saw the heaviest activity, with $130,166 in USDC traded. The order book was thin: moving the market 5 percentage points cost only $258. The largest single move was a 15-point spike, likely one large order pushing odds from 55% to 70%. What to watch The Claude 4.7 release on April 16 matches earlier bullish signals from Anthropic's announcements and documentation updates. With these markets now resolved, there's no remaining speculative value on this model's release timing. Trader attention shifts to Claude 5, which is unaffected by current events. Watch Anthropic's official channels and statements from Dario Amodei for any signals on that timeline.
ChatGPT maker OpenAI shifts its focus to business users amid Anthropic pressure
The same ChatGPT chatbot that gave OpenAI's chief financial officer Sarah Friar a tilapia recipe for a recent Sunday night dinner at home is also now doing her most mundane tasks at work like summarizing her emails and Slack messages. Friar and other company executives are banking OpenAI's future on more of the latter as it shifts its focus to business-oriented products while shedding some of its consumer offerings as a pathway to profitability. OpenAI says it will introduce a new artificial intelligence model for "high-value professional work" as the company faces heightened competition with rival Anthropic in attracting corporate customers to adopt AI assistants in their workplaces. "You'll see a new model coming from us in short order. We feel very excited about it," Friar said in an interview with The Associated Press. OpenAI boasts of more than 900 million weekly users of its core ChatGPT product, and Friar said about 95% of them "don't pay anything" for the popular chatbot. But while all those interactions build habits and reliance, they also strain the costly computing resources needed to power the company's AI systems and highlight the need for big business customers to help pay the bills. OpenAI, valued at $852 billion, and Anthropic, valued at $380 billion, both lose more money than they make, putting the privately-owned San Francisco-based AI research laboratories in a fierce competition to generate more revenue as they race toward becoming publicly traded on Wall Street. A push to improve performance and sales of OpenAI's business-oriented products -- already Anthropic's bread and butter -- has driven OpenAI to abandon some consumer initiatives, like the AI video generator app Sora. "I think it was a little heartbreaking, but we're like, OK, it's not the main event right now," Friar said. "We need to make sure that our new model that's coming has enough compute." Codenamed Spud, OpenAI says its "smartest model yet" offers "stronger reasoning, better understanding of intent and dependencies, better follow-through and more reliable output in production." It will be part of OpenAI's answer to Anthropic's new Claude Mythos, which Anthropic claims is so "strikingly capable" that it is limiting its use to select customers because of its apparent ability to surpass human cybersecurity experts in finding or exploiting computer vulnerabilities. While most people can't use Mythos, Anthropic also on Thursday released Opus 4.7, describing it as its most powerful "generally available" model. Friar, the former CEO of neighborhood social platform Nextdoor, said business customers accounted for about 20% of OpenAI's revenue when she was hired in 2024 as chief financial officer. She said it's now 40% and expected to account for half of OpenAI's sales by the end of the year. It's a sharp turnaround from late last year, when OpenAI co-founder and CEO Sam Altman was promoting a now-shuttered Sora partnership with Disney, launching a plan to sell ads on ChatGPT and floating the idea of letting ChatGPT engage in erotica with paid adult users. Altman said on the "Mostly Human" podcast earlier this month that a sharper focus was needed -- and Friar agrees. "Tech companies, when they're growing, it's just this natural thing that happens. There's so many cool things you could do," she said, adding that companies can end up doing "really badly" if they do too many things, while "great companies are very good at, in a reasonable period of time, kind of doing that winnowing down and refocusing and it's super painful." Signaling that shift was the hiring three months ago of Slack CEO Denise Dresser to be OpenAI's first chief revenue officer. Dresser said in a recent AP interview that she has been laser-focused on meeting with corporate leaders and positioning OpenAI as the go-to platform for workplaces employing AI agents to automate a variety of computer-based job tasks. "It's really clear to me that companies are past the experimentation phase and they're into using AI to do real work," Dresser said. "Leaders at companies are recognizing that AI is probably the most consequential shift of their lifetime." But those leaders also have a choice, namely Anthropic's Claude that has become widely used by software professionals. Founded in 2021 by a group of ex-OpenAI leaders who said they wanted to prioritize AI safety, Anthropic has positioned itself as the more responsible AI vendor. The distinction drew attention when President Donald Trump's administration punished the startup after a contract dispute over AI use in the military, and Altman used the opportunity to cement OpenAI's own deal with the Pentagon. Consumer interest in Anthropic surged and the company said its annualized revenues hit $30 billion, a higher number than what OpenAI has reported, though they measure it differently. Friar and Dresser declined to reveal OpenAI's latest sales but both have suggested that Anthropic's number is inflated because it doesn't account for revenue it must share with cloud computing providers Amazon and Google. Even so, it remains a tight competition that's also tied to the health of the stock market and the future of the economy. "They're likely quite close," said Luke Emberson, a researcher at nonprofit institute Epoch AI. "Certainly the trends show Anthropic is growing much faster than OpenAI. If that continues, they're likely to cross soon." The urgency led Dresser to send a memo to OpenAI employees on Sunday, first reported by The Verge, that asserted that Anthropic's coding focus "gave them an early wedge" but expressing confidence that OpenAI has the "real structural advantage" as AI usage expands beyond software developers and OpenAI builds enough computing capacity to operate its AI systems. "Their story is built on fear, restriction, and the idea that a small group of elites should control AI," Dresser's memo said of Anthropic. "Our positive message will win over time: build powerful systems, put in the right safeguards, expand access, and help people do more." But for skeptics of the financial viability of the AI industry, the trajectory of both money-losing companies is alarming as smaller startups increasingly become dependent on their AI tools. Anthropic has imposed rate limits on heavy users, forcing some to wait for hours to use Claude, and both companies have set up service tiers that reward premium payers, said author and AI critic Ed Zitron. "It's what I call the subprime AI crisis," Zitron said. "People built their lives and they built their businesses on top of these companies that, as they try and save money, will start turning the screws." One thing that both AI leaders and critics agree on is that it is an expensive technology, though whether it is worth the cost in electricity-hungry AI computers remains to be seen. "People will say, well, 'Once they go public, they're safe.' That's not true," Zitron said. "Public companies can and will die, especially ones that are dependent on $100 billion to $200 billion every year or so, just to keep breathing."
Claude is requiring some of its users to verify their identity. Here's Anthropic's explanation.
An Anthropic spokesperson wrote that ID verification will be used when it sees "potentially fraudulent or abusive behavior." Anthropic recently added "identity verification" to its safeguards, requiring some users to provide a passport, driver's license, or government ID, along with a live selfie. The company is rolling it out for "a few use cases," according to its Help Center. Anthropic says it's the "data controller," setting the rules for where ID data is used and how long it is kept. But Persona Identities, an ID verification startup, will collect and store the user information. Persona is contractually obligated to employ user data "only to provide and support verification and to improve their ability to prevent fraud," Anthropic said. So why is Anthropic asking some Claude users to prove who they are? "This applies to a small number of cases where we see activity that indicates potentially fraudulent or abusive behavior, which violates our usage policy," an Anthropic spokesperson wrote to Business Insider. If Anthropic deems that the activity violates its usage policy, the Claude user's account could be banned. Anthropic's help page lists the following potential reasons for why an account might be banned after completing ID verification: Anthropic also offers an appeals form that can be filled out if a user feels their account has been wrongfully banned. Claude users on X have already started noticing the requests for an ID. One user posted a screenshot of the request in Claude, which asked for a "quick identity check." It wrote that the request would only take two minutes and required an ID and mobile camera access. Another screenshot posted online shows what it looks like once the process is completed. "Thank you for verifying your identity," it wrote, accompanied by a celebratory graphic. The backlash on X was swift. "Anthropic making unexplainable decisions," one user wrote. "We are living in 1984," another wrote. In its Help Center, Anthropic also included a list of things it was not doing. Anthropic was not training its models on the data from ID verifications, it wrote. It also wrote that it wasn't sharing ID data with anyone beyond Anthropic and Persona, except where legally required. "We are not collecting more than we need," Anthropic wrote. "We ask for the minimum information required to verify your identity."
ChatGPT maker OpenAI shifts its focus to business users amid Anthropic pressure
The same ChatGPT chatbot that gave OpenAI's chief financial officer Sarah Friar a tilapia recipe for a recent Sunday night dinner at home is also now doing her most mundane tasks at work like summarizing her emails and Slack messages. Friar and other company executives are banking OpenAI's future on more of the latter as it shifts its focus to business-oriented products while shedding some of its consumer offerings as a pathway to profitability. OpenAI says it will introduce a new artificial intelligence model for "high-value professional work" as the company faces heightened competition with rival Anthropic in attracting corporate customers to adopt AI assistants in their workplaces. "You'll see a new model coming from us in short order. We feel very excited about it," Friar said in an interview with The Associated Press. OpenAI boasts of more than 900 million weekly users of its core ChatGPT product, and Friar said about 95% of them "don't pay anything" for the popular chatbot. But while all those interactions build habits and reliance, they also strain the costly computing resources needed to power the company's AI systems and highlight the need for big business customers to help pay the bills. OpenAI, valued at $852 billion, and Anthropic, valued at $380 billion, both lose more money than they make, putting the privately-owned San Francisco-based AI research laboratories in a fierce competition to generate more revenue as they race toward becoming publicly traded on Wall Street. A push to improve performance and sales of OpenAI's business-oriented products -- already Anthropic's bread and butter -- has driven OpenAI to abandon some consumer initiatives, like the AI video generator app Sora. "I think it was a little heartbreaking, but we're like, OK, it's not the main event right now," Friar said. "We need to make sure that our new model that's coming has enough compute." Codenamed Spud, OpenAI says its "smartest model yet" offers "stronger reasoning, better understanding of intent and dependencies, better follow-through and more reliable output in production." It will be part of OpenAI's answer to Anthropic's new Claude Mythos, which Anthropic claims is so "strikingly capable" that it is limiting its use to select customers because of its apparent ability to surpass human cybersecurity experts in finding or exploiting computer vulnerabilities. While most people can't use Mythos, Anthropic also on Thursday released Opus 4.7, describing it as its most powerful "generally available" model. Friar, the former CEO of neighborhood social platform Nextdoor, said business customers accounted for about 20% of OpenAI's revenue when she was hired in 2024 as chief financial officer. She said it's now 40% and expected to account for half of OpenAI's sales by the end of the year. It's a sharp turnaround from late last year, when OpenAI co-founder and CEO Sam Altman was promoting a now-shuttered Sora partnership with Disney, launching a plan to sell ads on ChatGPT and floating the idea of letting ChatGPT engage in erotica with paid adult users. Altman said on the "Mostly Human" podcast earlier this month that a sharper focus was needed -- and Friar agrees. "Tech companies, when they're growing, it's just this natural thing that happens. There's so many cool things you could do," she said, adding that companies can end up doing "really badly" if they do too many things, while "great companies are very good at, in a reasonable period of time, kind of doing that winnowing down and refocusing and it's super painful." Signaling that shift was the hiring three months ago of Slack CEO Denise Dresser to be OpenAI's first chief revenue officer. Dresser said in a recent AP interview that she has been laser-focused on meeting with corporate leaders and positioning OpenAI as the go-to platform for workplaces employing AI agents to automate a variety of computer-based job tasks. "It's really clear to me that companies are past the experimentation phase and they're into using AI to do real work," Dresser said. "Leaders at companies are recognizing that AI is probably the most consequential shift of their lifetime." But those leaders also have a choice, namely Anthropic's Claude that has become widely used by software professionals. Founded in 2021 by a group of ex-OpenAI leaders who said they wanted to prioritize AI safety, Anthropic has positioned itself as the more responsible AI vendor. The distinction drew attention when President Donald Trump's administration punished the startup after a contract dispute over AI use in the military, and Altman used the opportunity to cement OpenAI's own deal with the Pentagon. Consumer interest in Anthropic surged and the company said its annualized revenues hit $30 billion, a higher number than what OpenAI has reported, though they measure it differently. Friar and Dresser declined to reveal OpenAI's latest sales but both have suggested that Anthropic's number is inflated because it doesn't account for revenue it must share with cloud computing providers Amazon and Google. Even so, it remains a tight competition that's also tied to the health of the stock market and the future of the economy. "They're likely quite close," said Luke Emberson, a researcher at nonprofit institute Epoch AI. "Certainly the trends show Anthropic is growing much faster than OpenAI. If that continues, they're likely to cross soon." The urgency led Dresser to send a memo to OpenAI employees on Sunday, first reported by The Verge, that asserted that Anthropic's coding focus "gave them an early wedge" but expressing confidence that OpenAI has the "real structural advantage" as AI usage expands beyond software developers and OpenAI builds enough computing capacity to operate its AI systems. "Their story is built on fear, restriction, and the idea that a small group of elites should control AI," Dresser's memo said of Anthropic. "Our positive message will win over time: build powerful systems, put in the right safeguards, expand access, and help people do more." But for skeptics of the financial viability of the AI industry, the trajectory of both money-losing companies is alarming as smaller startups increasingly become dependent on their AI tools. Anthropic has imposed rate limits on heavy users, forcing some to wait for hours to use Claude, and both companies have set up service tiers that reward premium payers, said author and AI critic Ed Zitron. "It's what I call the subprime AI crisis," Zitron said. "People built their lives and they built their businesses on top of these companies that, as they try and save money, will start turning the screws." One thing that both AI leaders and critics agree on is that it is an expensive technology, though whether it is worth the cost in electricity-hungry AI computers remains to be seen. "People will say, well, 'Once they go public, they're safe.' That's not true," Zitron said. "Public companies can and will die, especially ones that are dependent on $100 billion to $200 billion every year or so, just to keep breathing."
