News & Updates
The latest news and updates from companies in the WLTH portfolio.
SpaceX Has Successful Starfall Demo
This a demo of a new vehicle that will enable affordable, routine access to the microgravity environment for scientific research and in-space manufacturing. After demonstrating controlled flight, the spacecraft will splash down in the Pacific Ocean I have numerous articles explaining how Starfall will unlock massive markets and capabilities. Space hotels, safe mass travel on Starship because it will eventally be able to return people and cargo anywhere on Earth without requiring any launch catch tower or other systems on the ground. Soyuz capsules are able to land on the ground because they have retro rockets to touch down at less 5 mph instead of 15-20 mph for parachuting into water. SpaceX has steerable parachutes that have been used over 300 times for precise fairing returns.
A Manhattan primary winner for a seat in Congress has a defiant message for OpenAI and Anthropic
The new Democratic nominee for a congressional seat in Manhattan had a strong message for the AI industry on Tuesday night. After defeating a crowded field of eight candidates in New York's 12th congressional district, Micah Lasher, who won by 39.1%, took aim at the tech giants and their allies who spent heavily to shape the outcome of the deep-blue seat. "I have some news for the two big AI companies who've taken such an unusual interest in who won this congressional seat," Lasher said at a rally at Jacob's Pickles, an NYC staple famous for elevating the pickle from a garnish to a main course, following his victory. "I won't be taking my cues from either of you when it comes to protecting our kids, our jobs." The swipe at AI companies didn't come out of nowhere. On the trail, Lasher cast himself as a skeptic of Silicon Valley's push for lighter-touch regulation, stating on his website that AI could "displace workers, exacerbate inequalities, and pose a threat to our environment and public safety." He has also raised concerns about the rapid expansion of AI data centers and the industry's growing energy demands. The race in Manhattan became an unlikely battleground in the fight over how Washington should regulate AI, illustrating a schism in Silicon Valley. Millions of dollars flowed into the contest, much of it aimed at either helping or hurting Assemblymember Alex Bores, a Democrat and former Palantir employee who backed stronger AI safeguards, as competing factions of the tech world backed different candidates and different visions for AI policy. Bores quit Palantir during Donald Trump's first term, citing concerns about the company's work on immigration enforcement. According to Federal Election Commission filings, Think Big, a super PAC opposed to additional AI regulations backed in part by leaders at OpenAI and Andreessen Horowitz, spent about $8 million to prevent Bores from winning. Meanwhile, tech giants backing more AI safety regulations, including the Jobs and Democracy PAC, supported by donors with ties to Anthropic and Adobe, spent more than $13 million to boost Bores' candidacy. The clash came as New York emerges as one of the more aggressive states in the country in regulating the AI industry, and as data centers have become a growing flash point. New York State lawmakers have advanced proposals that would temporarily halt the issuance of permits for large new data centers while officials study their impact on the electric grid, utility bills, water consumption, and climate goals. Lasher is a cosponsor of New York's Responsible AI Safety and Education Act, a proposal aimed at placing safeguards on advanced AI systems, which is the same legislation that made Bores a target for some AI industry groups. Anthropic, OpenAI, and the Lasher campaign did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
SpaceX executes massive IPO and explores merger with Tesla amid AI ambitions
SpaceX raised $75 billion at $135 per share on Nasdaq, briefly crossing a $2 trillion market cap before a sharp pullback triggered fresh questions about a potential Tesla merger The world's most anticipated private company finally went public, and it did not disappoint on the drama front. SpaceX priced its initial public offering at $135 per share on June 12, 2026, raising $75 billion in what stands as a record-breaking market debut. Underwriter options pushed that figure to $86 billion. The Nasdaq listing under ticker SPCX gave SpaceX an opening valuation of roughly $1.77 trillion. Early trading sent shares surging toward $226, briefly pushing the market cap above $2 trillion before a pullback of up to 32% from those highs. The AI engine underneath the rocket company In early 2026, SpaceX acquired xAI, Elon Musk's artificial intelligence venture, folding it into the broader corporate structure. The goal, according to the company, is to combine space infrastructure with AI-driven optimization, including managing energy consumption across operations. The Tesla merger question Post-IPO, the conversation shifted quickly to a question that has been circulating in investment circles for months: could SpaceX and Tesla merge? SpaceX president Gwynne Shotwell added fuel to that speculation by publicly remarking on the potential benefits such a combination could offer Musk personally and operationally. Analysts who have looked at the combined numbers suggest a merged entity could carry a valuation exceeding $3 trillion. The risks, though, are real and specific to Tesla. Tesla's stock performance has been uneven, and absorbing its volatility into a newly public SpaceX could create complications for SPCX shareholders who bought in expecting a pure-play aerospace and AI story. No formal offer has been made, no merger agreement has been signed, and both companies continue to operate independently. What this means for investors watching from the crypto side No digital assets were directly referenced during the IPO process or in the merger discussions, and there is no indication SpaceX is building a crypto treasury strategy the way some tech-adjacent companies have experimented with. The 32% pullback from intraday highs on the first day of trading also tells a story. It suggests that even with record demand, the market is not writing blank checks for speculative tech stories right now.
Elon Musk loses trillionaire status as global tech rout hits SpaceX
Tech entrepreneur Elon Musk lost his trillionaire status on Tuesday, less than two weeks after becoming the first person to achieve it following SpaceX's public debut, according to Bloomberg data. The Bloomberg Billionaires Index - updated daily at 17:30 in New York (22:30 BST) - valued his fortune at $957bn (£727bn) on Tuesday, down from the $1.11tn valuation less than 14 days ago. The reversal followed a sharp retreat in SpaceX and Tesla shares as technology stocks broadly tumbled, fuelled by growing doubts over the long-term profitability of artificial intelligence. Despite the loss, Musk remains the world's richest person, and his wealth still dwarfs that of his nearest rivals. The billionaire made history on 12 June with the highly anticipated public market debut of his rocket company, SpaceX, on Nasdaq. The blockbuster initial public offering (IPO) was priced at $135 per share and opened at $150 on its first day of trading. The debut valued the rocket and satellite giant at more than $1.77 trillion. Because Musk owned roughly 42% of SpaceX, the listing instantly propelled his paper fortune past the $1 trillion mark. By 16 June, surging investor enthusiasm drove SpaceX shares to a peak of $225.64, pushing Musk's net worth to a record $1.32 trillion. However, the market rally did not last. Concerns over capital spending, artificial intelligence infrastructure costs, and stubborn interest rates triggered a widespread tech sell-off and hit high-flying technology giants such as Nvidia, Intel, and AMD, particularly hard. But SpaceX shares bore the brunt of the correction, plunging more than 30% from their mid-June peak to trade around $156. On a single turbulent Monday, 22 June, a 16% single-day drop erased an estimated $240 billion from Musk's personal balance sheet. Concurrently, shares of his electric vehicle venture, Tesla, slid nearly 6% the following day, compounding the financial damage. Musk owned about 12% of Tesla's outstanding shares. Musk's trillionaire status is uniquely vulnerable due to the extreme concentration of his wealth. Unlike traditional billionaires with diversified portfolios, his fortune is almost entirely tied to equity in just two companies: SpaceX, which accounts for nearly 80% of his net worth, and Tesla. Market analysts note that post-IPO volatility is entirely standard for highly valued growth firms, though the scale of the movement reflects a deeper tug-of-war between hype and reality. "For a stock like SpaceX, a lot of decision-making might have been emotional and based on the anticipation of huge leaps forward in space exploration and utilisation, but investing should be something treated with clear eyes and patience, even when such huge numbers are involved," said Danni Hewson, head of financial analysis at AJ Bell. With restrictions lifting in late July, allowing company insiders to finally sell their shares in stages, market pressure may continue. However, because a modest 6% recovery in SpaceX stock would restore his 13-figure status, Musk may simply become the world's first recurring trillionaire.
SpaceX's 32% crash may force Musk into radical move
Less than two weeks ago, SpaceX became the most valuable company ever to go public, raising $75 billion at a valuation north of $1.7 trillion and closing its debut session up 19%, according to CNBC. On June 22, SpaceX posted its worst single-day loss as a public company, plunging 16% to close at $154.60, just 14% above its $135 IPO price and barely above its $150 opening-day trade, CNBC reported. The stock now sits roughly 32% below its all-time high, and a prominent Wall Street analyst is arguing the sell-off may accelerate a move Musk has been assembling for months. Four reasons why SpaceX should merge with Tesla Below are four reasons a SpaceX-Tesla merger would make the combined entity more appealing to long-term investors, as outlined by Daniel Foelber of The Motley Fool. 1. Simplification While Tesla has been a public company for longer, SpaceX has been the one slowly absorbing Musk's other ventures. In 2025, xAI bought social media platform X (the former Twitter), TechCrunch reported. Then, earlier this year, SpaceX bought xAI, but the bulk of Musk's robotics, energy storage, and autonomous-vehicle ideas remain within Tesla. Wedbush Securities Managing Director and Senior Equity Research Analyst Dan Ives said it's likely that SpaceX will ultimately merge with Tesla, Benzinga noted. I think that's the step process that they'll go through, and then ultimately a merger with Tesla... I think 80%, 90% type of chance. Merging Tesla with SpaceX would bring all these ideas and creativity under one umbrella, eliminating the operational confusion that currently splits Musk's empire across separate corporate structures. 2. Terafab collaboration In March, Elon Muskgave a presentation on a collaborative effort among Tesla, xAI, and SpaceX to build the world's largest chip plant, Terafab, and Intel joined the project as a foundry partner in April. Musk discussed why Tesla, xAI, and SpaceX are builders and have already accomplished once-impossible feats. This is yet another signal that "we" refers to the collective efforts of Musk-led companies. SpaceX is designing its AI compute satellites to operate on Nvidia graphics processing units and has a reference design for Alphabet's Tensor Processing Units. But AI compute capacity will be a limiting factor in scaling AI satellite production. xAI built the world's first gigawatt-scale AI training cluster, and SpaceX believes it is the only company capable of building orbital AI compute at scale. 3. xAI as a key ingredient Merging SpaceX and Tesla would give xAI a straightforward path to support both companies, rather than having Tesla serve as both a partner and a customer.
Cathie Wood's ARK buys Cerebras Systems stock, sells Roku shares By Investing.com
Cathie Wood's ARK ETF published their daily trades for Wednesday, June 24th, 2026, revealing a significant purchase in Cerebras Systems Inc (NASDAQ:CBRS) and a continued reduction in Roku Inc (NASDAQ:ROKU). The most notable transaction today was ARK's acquisition of 99,154 shares of Cerebras Systems Inc, totaling $22,480,194. This investment was spread across its ARKK and ARKW ETFs, marking a strong vote of confidence in the AI hardware company. This purchase follows a similar pattern from the previous day, where ARK added 25,795 shares of Cerebras Systems. In contrast, ARK continued its divestment from Roku Inc, selling 65,246 shares for $8,812,124 across multiple ETFs, including ARKK, ARKW, and ARKF. This move is part of a broader trend, as ARK has been consistently reducing its position in Roku over the past week. Another significant buy was 7,293 shares of Eli Lilly and Co (NYSE:LLY) through the ARKG ETF, with a total value of $8,073,934. This follows a substantial purchase of Eli Lilly shares last week, indicating ARK's ongoing interest in the pharmaceutical giant. ARK also increased its holdings in Recursion Pharmaceuticals Inc (NASDAQ:RXRX) by acquiring 260,020 shares valued at $821,663, and added 21,275 shares of Tempus AI Inc (NASDAQ:TEM) for $1,034,177. On the selling side, ARK offloaded 675,357 shares of Absci Corp (NASDAQ:ABSI) through its ARKG ETF, amounting to $5,004,395. Additionally, ARK sold 29,686 shares of Twist Bioscience Corp (NASDAQ:TWST) for $2,523,310, continuing a sell-off trend seen earlier in the week. The trades also included smaller transactions such as the purchase of 31,998 shares of Alamar Biosciences Inc (NASDAQ:ALMR) for $734,034, and 50,900 shares of Generate Biomedicines Inc (NASDAQ:GENB) for $785,387. Meanwhile, ARK sold 56,358 shares of Strata Critical Medical Inc (NASDAQ:SRTA) for $313,914. These moves reflect ARK's strategic shifts in its portfolio, with a notable focus on AI and biotechnology sectors, while scaling back on certain media and technology holdings. This article was generated with the support of AI and reviewed by an editor. For more information see our T&C.
SpaceX Volatility Sparks 30% Plunge in Aerospace ETFs
SpaceX's Bond Issuance, Fed Rate Fears Exacerbate Market Jitters, Impacting ETFs The bellwether stock of the global aerospace sector, SpaceX, has continued its sluggish trend, causing the returns of aerospace exchange-traded funds (ETFs) to plummet. Analysts attribute the volatility across the aerospace stock sector to SpaceX, which has a market capitalization of 2 trillion dollars (approximately 3,000 trillion Korean won), making it the seventh-largest company globally. ◇Repeated Surges and Plummets at SpaceX Since listing on the U.S. Nasdaq on June 12, SpaceX has exhibited significant stock price volatility. The company's shares surged 19.22% on the listing day, followed by further jumps of 19.60% on June 15 and 4.83% on June 16. However, the trend reversed on June 17, with declines of 4.95% and 3.56% over two days, culminating in a 16.43% plunge on June 22. The June 22 drop is attributed to the announcement of SpaceX's large-scale corporate bond issuance plan. SpaceX had planned to issue bonds to repay a $20 billion high-interest short-term borrowing secured in March. The plunge coincided with spreading expectations that the U.S. Federal Reserve might raise interest rates within the year, which sharply dampened investor sentiment. SpaceX's stock closed at $154.54 on June 24, down 1.01% from the previous day, marking its lowest closing price to date. As a result, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk surrendered the title of the world's first 'trillionaire.' On June 24, Forbes reported that Musk's net worth stood at $962 billion based on June 23 closing prices, falling below $1 trillion. Although his assets had swelled to $1.1 trillion following SpaceX's listing on June 12, the stock decline caused him to step down from being humanity's first trillionaire. ◇Aerospace ETFs See Steady Declines The slump in the bellwether stock has dragged down the returns of aerospace ETFs. According to Koscom ETF data on June 25, aerospace ETFs occupied two spots among the top five domestic ETFs with the largest price declines over the past month. PLUS Aerospace, ranking second with a -34.15% drop, and TIGER U.S. Space Tech, fourth with -30.30%, led the losses. PLUS Aerospace invests in major domestic aerospace stocks like Korea Aerospace Industries and LIG Defense & Aerospace, while TIGER U.S. Space Tech focuses on U.S. aerospace firms including SpaceX and Rocket Lab. The broad downward pressure on aerospace stocks, both domestic and international, caused the sharp declines. Other aerospace ETFs such as SOL U.S. Aerospace Top 10 (-25.12%), ACE U.S. Space Tech Active (-20.88%), and KODEX U.S. Aerospace (-20.15%) followed similar trends. Among aerospace ETFs, those without SpaceX exposure managed to outperform. For instance, the WON U.S. Aerospace & Defense ETF, which does not hold SpaceX, rose 4.7% over the past month. Unlike larger ETFs, it avoided exposure to SpaceX's price decline, successfully defending its returns. Financial sector analysts anticipate that aerospace stocks will continue to experience volatility driven by SpaceX's stock movements in the near term. Kim Se-hwan, a researcher at KB Securities, stated, "The announcement of SpaceX's corporate bond issuance plan has amplified concerns over its financial burden and overvaluation." He added, "Despite holding approximately $100 billion in cash-equivalent assets, SpaceX's push to expand large-scale borrowing has raised significant worries." Cho Seung-bin, a researcher at Daishin Securities, noted, "SpaceX's massive fundraising is influencing global financial market liquidity amid ongoing valuation debates." He explained, "Compared to past major tech IPOs, SpaceX's revenue growth rate of 33.2% in the year preceding its listing was relatively low, while its price-to-sales ratio (PSR) remained excessively high." Anxiety is growing among individual investors who directly invested in SpaceX. Kim, 29 years old and residing in Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, said, "I jumped in the next day after seeing SpaceX's surge post-listing, but my returns are now in the negative 20% range." He added, "I plan to sell half if I recover the principal and wait." According to the Korea Securities Depository, Seohak ants (Korean retail investors buying foreign stocks) net purchased $1.879 billion worth of SpaceX shares from June 12 to 24. This period saw SpaceX as the top net purchase, nine times larger than the second-placed Roundhill Memory ETF's $207.69 million net purchases, highlighting intense demand.
Rocket Lab, Lockheed Martin among the partners in SpaceX's military space-laser project
Government documents show a lineup of defense contractors joining SpaceX to create a satellite network to track airborne threats The U.S. government is tapping both of the country's biggest launch providers, Rocket Lab and SpaceX, for its Space-Based Airborne Moving Target Indicator (SB-AMTI) program. Rocket Lab, Lockheed Martin and L3 Harris Technologies are among a group of eight aerospace and defense companies sharing a multibillion-dollar military vendor pool with SpaceX for a new space defense program, government documents show. Last month, Space Systems Command - an organization under the U.S. Space Force - announced that it had awarded SpaceX (SPCX) a $4.16 billion contract for the Space-Based Airborne Moving Target Indicator (SB-AMTI) program. The Space Force, a branch of the U.S. Armed Forces under the Department of the Air Force, had previously indicated that there were a total of nine vendors in the pool. According to government records posted on the federal government's procurement portal managed by the General Services Administration, Rocket Lab (RKLB), York Space Systems (YSS), Visto 360 AI, Wildstar and Systems & Technology Research received contracts valued at $10,000 each under the SB-AMTI initiative. The records were first flagged on social media by space investor Jacob Keeton and a user of the social-media platform X posting under the handle @trypto_tran. Government records also showed that Northrop Grumman (NOC), Lockheed Martin (LMT) and L3 Harris (LHX) received contracts for $6,666 each under the SB-AMTI initiative. All nine SB-AMTI contracts were signed between March 23 and March 25 of this year and run until March 2031. A Space Force spokesperson told MarketWatch that Space Systems Command could neither confirm nor deny the vendor identities due to national-security interests. Representatives for SpaceX, Rocket Lab, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, L3Harris Technologies, Systems & Technology Research, Wildstar and Visto 360 AI did not immediately respond to requests for comment from MarketWatch. York Space Systems said that it could not confirm or deny any information about the contract posted on the government website. SpaceX's contract shows that the ultimate scope of the SB-AMTI program - which aims to implement a space-based sensing layer to track and target airborne threats - extends far beyond the Pentagon's initial $4.16 billion disclosure. SpaceX secured $2.637 billion in total obligations in March, with the agreement's maximum potential contract value capping at $9.34 billion. The other eight vendors' total obligations of $10,000 and $6,666 are placeholder allocations designed to grant them a position in the vendor pool. Traditionally, the U.S. military has tracked airborne threats, such as missiles and drones, by flying aircraft over areas of interest. However, the rapid proliferation of advanced antiaircraft missiles by foreign adversaries has diminished the effectiveness of this strategy. This SB-AMTI award is projected to deploy a constellation of satellites in low-Earth orbit by 2028 to continuously monitor global airspace and eliminate operational blind spots. Satellites with advanced sensors will sweep through airspace to pick up information that traditional airborne radars can't read, then beam the data through a laser-linked orbital mesh network directly to meet warfighter needs. SpaceX and Rocket Lab are the two biggest launch-services providers in the U.S., and also provide end-to-end satellite manufacturing services. In the May announcement, Space System Command shared that "Space Force anticipates issuing multiple awards in the coming year to drive a vendor-diverse expansion" - a signal that the nine-vendor pool anchored by SpaceX is only the beginning of a larger pipeline. -Christine Ji This content was created by MarketWatch, which is operated by Dow Jones & Co. MarketWatch is published independently from Dow Jones Newswires and The Wall Street Journal. (END) Dow Jones Newswires 06-24-26 1947ET Copyright (c) 2026 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
Is Tesla Stock Better Than SpaceX? The Answer Might Surprise You.
Space Exploration Technologies (NASDAQ: SPCX) successfully executed one of the largest IPOs in history on June 12. Even after a the stock tumbled this week, SpaceX's valuation is more than Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA), another trillion-dollar business led by Elon Musk. Last year, Tesla booked a $3.8 billion profit. SpaceX, meanwhile, recorded a $4.9 billion loss in 2025. From this perspective, Tesla may appear to be the superior investment. After all, why should investors opt for a money-losing business? Missed Nvidia in 2009? This Rare Signal Is Flashing Again. In 2009, a "Double Down" signal flashed for a little-known chipmaker called Nvidia. For the first time in years, that same "Total Conviction" signal is flashing for a company 1/100th the size of Nvidia. Continue " A deeper dive, however, reveals a more telling truth: Both companies trade at extremely high valuations. Even with positive profits, Tesla stock trades at more than 370 times earnings. The S&P 500, for comparison, trades at roughly 32 times earnings. Why are both stocks trading at such nosebleed levels? The answer to this question reveals a lot about both businesses. It also provides an answer to which stock is better for investors in the long term. SpaceX and Tesla aren't that different after all Most investors think of Tesla as an electric vehicle stock. And that's true, at least in part. Last year, Tesla's Model Y was the second-best-selling passenger car in the world. Tesla's Model 3 also came in as one of the most popular sedans globally, electric or otherwise. But Tesla's auto sales have been declining for several years. Last year, Tesla's auto sales fell by 8%. The year before, the company's auto sales slipped by 1%. So yes, Tesla very much remains an EV producer. But with declining volumes, its status as an EV company hardly explains its $1.2 trillion market cap, which is higher than 370 times earnings. SpaceX, too, is a curious case. The company itself claims that its total addressable market for rockets is only around $370 billion. Its satellite connectivity business, meanwhile, only has a total addressable market of $1.6 trillion. So even if SpaceX captured 100% of its long-term growth opportunities in these segments, that would only equate to around $2 trillion -- several hundred billion dollars less than the company's current market cap. Image source: Getty Images. The missing link is artificial intelligence. Both Tesla and SpaceX have essentially bet their entire business models on AI. Given that AI is one of the hottest areas of the market right now, investors are willing to pay top dollar for leading AI companies. That's true for Tesla even though its core legacy business is struggling. It's also true for SpaceX despite the company's lack of profitability. "We believe we have identified the largest actionable total addressable market in human history," management said in SpaceX's IPO prospectus. More than 90% of its total addressable market isn't rockets or satellites, but AI, which is values at $26.5 trillion. Tesla, meanwhile, is chasing a $10 trillion market also based heavily on AI: robotaxis. "We think $8 trillion to $10 trillion for the entire autonomous taxi opportunity throughout the world, from almost nothing," Cathie Wood, CEO of Ark Invest predicts. "That's how quickly AI is going to cause these things to happen." Which stock is better: SpaceX or Tesla? Surprisingly, both stocks face a very similar fate. If they fail at realizing their AI potential, both shares are likely a sell. If they succeed, it's possible there is plenty of upside to both stocks long term. It's no wonder, then, that Musk is reportedly looking to merge Tesla and SpaceX. Betting markets currently predict a 51% chance of a merger by March of 2027. Even Musk's biographer is predicting a merger. "I think there will be a Tesla-SpaceX merger buyout, because it makes sense," Walter Isaacson recently told reporters. Over the next 12 months, it may be moot whether Tesla or SpaceX is a superior stock pick. If betting markets and a growing number of experts are correct, we could see the two businesses become one fairly soon. Their shared AI ambitions are more than enough to justify a merger should regulators and shareholders approve. Where to invest $1,000 right now When our analyst team has a stock tip, it can pay to listen. After all, Stock Advisor's total average return is 897%* -- a market-crushing outperformance compared to 208% for the S&P 500. They just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy right now, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the stocks " *Stock Advisor returns as of June 24, 2026. Ryan Vanzo has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Tesla. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.
Anthropic accuses Alibaba of 'illicitly' accessing AI models
ANTHROPIC accused Chinese technology giant Alibaba of waging a large-scale effort to "illicitly" access its Claude artificial intelligence model using thousands of fraudulent accounts that undermine the US AI developer's decision to keep its products out of China. Anthropic claimed that a campaign by operators linked to Alibaba's Qwen AI lab targeted Claude's most prized capabilities, including software engineering and agentic reasoning, according to a letter that the AI startup sent to several US senators and White House officials. The company said that it was the biggest attempt so far by a Chinese company to piggyback on the work of top US labs. In its letter, Anthropic claimed that the effort involved 28.8 million exchanges with Claude between April and June through almost 25,000 fraudulent accounts, according to sources familiar with the document and a copy seen by Bloomberg News. The company said that the Alibaba campaign resembled past efforts by other Chinese developers that Anthropic flagged in a blog post earlier this year. Anthropic warned that Alibaba and other Chinese labs are making systematic and unauthorised use of results from leading US models to develop a rival generation of chatbots at a fraction of the cost via a practice known as adversarial distillation. It cautioned that AI systems built using this method often lack safety guardrails, and the firm urged the Trump administration to step up efforts to halt the practice. "These distillation attacks are carried out illicitly, systematically, and at an industrial scale to harvest US Al capabilities across frontier labs and repackage them as their own without incurring the training and R&D costs required to train US frontier models," Anthropic wrote in its letter. Alibaba had no comment. An Anthropic spokesperson declined to enter into specifics on the letter but emphasised the importance of combating distillation through "coordinated action between government and industry". Anthropic's letter marked the latest call from top American AI companies to rein in some kinds of distillation, where developers train systems using results from another AI model to create similar capabilities in a new one at a far lower cost. While tolerated for training smaller, less-advanced systems, distillation violates AI labs' terms of use when it's employed to replicate a cutting-edge AI model without permission. The practice has alarmed US developers to the point that Anthropic, OpenAI and Alphabet's Google have joined forces to share information about distillation attempts that violate their terms of service. Anthropic and OpenAI have each warned that Chinese AI startups, including DeepSeek and Minimax, have employed distillation to develop their own models. Lawmakers in Washington are moving to address the US industry's concerns. In the Senate, Tennessee Republican Bill Hagerty and New Jersey Democrat Andy Kim plan to introduce an amendment to must-pass defence legislation as soon as Wednesday that would blacklist or sanction any Chinese firm found to be improperly accessing US AI model output to help train competing models, according to a source with the matter. It's unclear whether the amendment would win enough support to be included in the defence bill's final version. A related bipartisan bill in the House, backed by Michigan Republican Bill Huizenga and Democrat Sydney Kamlager-Dove, is also set to be considered for inclusion in the annual defence measure. Those proposals follow initial steps by the Trump administration on the issue. In April, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy Director Michael Kratsios published a memo indicating the US would help to crack down on attempts by Chinese companies to exploit outputs from US models. The memo described it as different from legitimate research practices due to its "industrial scale" and reliance on thousands of proxy accounts. Anthropic said that the Alibaba campaign took place after Kratsios released his memo, in defiance of the administration's warnings. It cautioned that a failure to respond to such attempts risks letting China gain ground on the US in AI, posing a threat to national security. The claims against Alibaba add to growing political pressure in Washington on the company, which earlier this month was added to a US Defense Department blacklist of businesses that allegedly support China's armed forces - a development cited in Anthropic's letter. Alibaba has insisted it has no affiliation with the Chinese military and sued the Pentagon this week to win removal of the designation. For Anthropic, the threat of cheaper imitation products from China that syphon away customers looms large as the company, now valued by private investors at US$965 billion, prepares for an initial public offering. US officials have estimated that unauthorised distillation costs Silicon Valley labs billions of US dollars, Bloomberg has reported. With its letter, Anthropic is urging the US to clarify antitrust guidelines to allow more information sharing by US companies on distillation. It reiterated the company's support for export controls on advanced AI chips and asked for the US to penalise firms using distillation to glean valuable information for creating their own models. Anthropic's calls for additional government support in countering what it sees as unfair practices by Chinese rivals may not find a fully receptive audience with the White House. The company is embroiled in a fresh dispute with the Trump administration, which less than two weeks ago imposed export controls on Anthropic's top two models, citing security concerns. Even after meetings between Anthropic's top technical staff and White House officials last week, little progress has been made to ease tensions and restore service to the company's Fable 5 and Mythos 5 AI systems. The company disabled access to the models more than a week ago, after the Commerce Department imposed restrictions to block foreign persons from using those AI tools. BLOOMBERG
Is Tesla Stock Better Than SpaceX? The Answer Might Surprise You.
Space Exploration Technologies (NASDAQ: SPCX) successfully executed one of the largest IPOs in history on June 12. Even after a the stock tumbled this week, SpaceX's valuation is more than Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA), another trillion-dollar business led by Elon Musk. Last year, Tesla booked a $3.8 billion profit. SpaceX, meanwhile, recorded a $4.9 billion loss in 2025. From this perspective, Tesla may appear to be the superior investment. After all, why should investors opt for a money-losing business? Missed Nvidia in 2009? This Rare Signal Is Flashing Again. In 2009, a "Double Down" signal flashed for a little-known chipmaker called Nvidia. For the first time in years, that same "Total Conviction" signal is flashing for a company 1/100th the size of Nvidia. Continue " A deeper dive, however, reveals a more telling truth: Both companies trade at extremely high valuations. Even with positive profits, Tesla stock trades at more than 370 times earnings. The S&P 500, for comparison, trades at roughly 32 times earnings. Why are both stocks trading at such nosebleed levels? The answer to this question reveals a lot about both businesses. It also provides an answer to which stock is better for investors in the long term. SpaceX and Tesla aren't that different after all Most investors think of Tesla as an electric vehicle stock. And that's true, at least in part. Last year, Tesla's Model Y was the second-best-selling passenger car in the world. Tesla's Model 3 also came in as one of the most popular sedans globally, electric or otherwise. But Tesla's auto sales have been declining for several years. Last year, Tesla's auto sales fell by 8%. The year before, the company's auto sales slipped by 1%. So yes, Tesla very much remains an EV producer. But with declining volumes, its status as an EV company hardly explains its $1.2 trillion market cap, which is higher than 370 times earnings. SpaceX, too, is a curious case. The company itself claims that its total addressable market for rockets is only around $370 billion. Its satellite connectivity business, meanwhile, only has a total addressable market of $1.6 trillion. So even if SpaceX captured 100% of its long-term growth opportunities in these segments, that would only equate to around $2 trillion -- several hundred billion dollars less than the company's current market cap. The missing link is artificial intelligence. Both Tesla and SpaceX have essentially bet their entire business models on AI. Given that AI is one of the hottest areas of the market right now, investors are willing to pay top dollar for leading AI companies. That's true for Tesla even though its core legacy business is struggling. It's also true for SpaceX despite the company's lack of profitability.
Elon Musk loses his trillionaire status as SpaceX stock comes back to Earth
SpaceX's stock decline is part of a larger sell-off across the tech industry. Elon Musk is headed back down to Earth. The richest person in the world is no longer a trillionaire after Tesla and SpaceX share prices plunged during Tuesday's global stock sell-off. He is now worth $957 billion, according to Bloomberg's Billionaires Index. Musk became a trillionaire earlier this month, moments after SpaceX's historic initial public offering valued the rocket company at more than $2 trillion. The stock rallied for days, with retail investors eager to get in on the company's sci-fi-like promises. But this week, SpaceX's stock has plummeted. Shares closed around $156 on Tuesday, down more than 30% from an intraday peak of $225 on June 16, though still more than the $150 at which shares began trading on June 12. Tech stocks have been hit in recent days amid fears of an AI bubble and an interest rate increase. Some analysts have questioned SpaceX's sky-high valuation and moonshot goals, from data centers in space to putting humans on Mars. The coming expiration of the lockup period, when early investors and shareholders can cash out their stakes, will be a major test. SpaceX's S-1 filing ahead of the IPO revealed that the company posted a $4.9 billion loss in 2025, with its money-losing AI segment racking up $12.7 billion in capital expenditures. The rocket company is still Musk's most valuable asset. His shares were worth $744 billion as of Tuesday, and accounted for nearly 80% of his net worth, according to Bloomberg. His stake in Tesla, worth $158 billion, has also been hit by the sell-off. Of course, market fluctuations are typical -- and if SpaceX bounces back, so will Musk's net worth. Musk's fortune still significantly exceeds that of the richest runner-up, Google cofounder Larry Page. For perspective, the discrepancy between the two -- roughly $660 billion -- is equivalent to more than two Jeff Bezoses. If you enjoyed this story, be sure to follow Business Insider on Yahoo.
Is Tesla Stock Better Than SpaceX? The Answer Might Surprise You.
Space Exploration Technologies (SPCX 1.01%) successfully executed one of the largest IPOs in history on June 12. Even after a the stock tumbled this week, SpaceX's valuation is more than Tesla (TSLA 1.61%), another trillion-dollar business led by Elon Musk. Last year, Tesla booked a $3.8 billion profit. SpaceX, meanwhile, recorded a $4.9 billion loss in 2025. From this perspective, Tesla may appear to be the superior investment. After all, why should investors opt for a money-losing business? A deeper dive, however, reveals a more telling truth: Both companies trade at extremely high valuations. Even with positive profits, Tesla stock trades at more than 370 times earnings. The S&P 500, for comparison, trades at roughly 32 times earnings. Why are both stocks trading at such nosebleed levels? The answer to this question reveals a lot about both businesses. It also provides an answer to which stock is better for investors in the long term. SpaceX and Tesla aren't that different after all Most investors think of Tesla as an electric vehicle stock. And that's true, at least in part. Last year, Tesla's Model Y was the second-best-selling passenger car in the world. Tesla's Model 3 also came in as one of the most popular sedans globally, electric or otherwise. But Tesla's auto sales have been declining for several years. Last year, Tesla's auto sales fell by 8%. The year before, the company's auto sales slipped by 1%. So yes, Tesla very much remains an EV producer. But with declining volumes, its status as an EV company hardly explains its $1.2 trillion market cap, which is higher than 370 times earnings. SpaceX, too, is a curious case. The company itself claims that its total addressable market for rockets is only around $370 billion. Its satellite connectivity business, meanwhile, only has a total addressable market of $1.6 trillion. So even if SpaceX captured 100% of its long-term growth opportunities in these segments, that would only equate to around $2 trillion -- several hundred billion dollars less than the company's current market cap. The missing link is artificial intelligence. Both Tesla and SpaceX have essentially bet their entire business models on AI. Given that AI is one of the hottest areas of the market right now, investors are willing to pay top dollar for leading AI companies. That's true for Tesla even though its core legacy business is struggling. It's also true for SpaceX despite the company's lack of profitability. "We believe we have identified the largest actionable total addressable market in human history," management said in SpaceX's IPO prospectus. More than 90% of its total addressable market isn't rockets or satellites, but AI, which is values at $26.5 trillion. Tesla, meanwhile, is chasing a $10 trillion market also based heavily on AI: robotaxis. "We think $8 trillion to $10 trillion for the entire autonomous taxi opportunity throughout the world, from almost nothing," Cathie Wood, CEO of Ark Invest predicts. "That's how quickly AI is going to cause these things to happen." Which stock is better: SpaceX or Tesla? Surprisingly, both stocks face a very similar fate. If they fail at realizing their AI potential, both shares are likely a sell. If they succeed, it's possible there is plenty of upside to both stocks long term. It's no wonder, then, that Musk is reportedly looking to merge Tesla and SpaceX. Betting markets currently predict a 51% chance of a merger by March of 2027. Even Musk's biographer is predicting a merger. "I think there will be a Tesla-SpaceX merger buyout, because it makes sense," Walter Isaacson recently told reporters. Over the next 12 months, it may be moot whether Tesla or SpaceX is a superior stock pick. If betting markets and a growing number of experts are correct, we could see the two businesses become one fairly soon. Their shared AI ambitions are more than enough to justify a merger should regulators and shareholders approve.
Polymarket Promo Code COVERS: Deposit $20 for a $50 Prediction Market Bonus on Czechia vs Mexico
Polymarket promo code COVERS unlocks a $50 bonus. Trade on Czechia vs Mexico Group A today! Use the Polymarket promo code COVERS to claim a $50 bonus on one of the best prediction market apps available. New users can activate this offer as of June 24 by depositing just $20 after registration. Put your new account to work by trading on the Czechia vs Mexico Group A clash. Polymarket Promo Code: Claim Your $50 Bonus for Czechia vs Mexico Using the Polymarket promo code COVERS during sign-up unlocks a $50 welcome bonus for new users in most U.S. states. The offer is available everywhere except Nevada, and you must be physically located in an eligible state to qualify. A minimum deposit of $20 is required to activate the reward. Here are the key terms to keep in mind before claiming: * Available in all U.S. states except Nevada * Must deposit a minimum of $20 to trigger the bonus * Code must be entered at registration, not after sign-up * Proof of ID required, including a photo of a driver's license or passport and a selfie * Social Security Number verification may also be required Once your account is funded, you can trade on the Czechia vs Mexico Group A match. If you trade on Mexico to win and El Tri delivers the result, your position pays out accordingly. If Czechia pulls off the upset and your trade does not resolve in your favor, the $50 bonus provides a cushion to keep trading. Polymarket goes well beyond sports, offering prediction markets on politics, economics, entertainment, and more, making it a uniquely versatile platform. Check out the best prediction market promos to see how this offer stacks up against the competition. Use the correct Polymarket promo code for your state How to Claim Your Offer and Trade on Czechia vs Mexico Follow these simple steps to get started with Polymarket and place your first trade on the Group A finale: Pages related to this topic
Live Coverage: West Coast Falcon 9 launch to continue expansion of SpaceX's Starlink network
SpaceX is counting down to a Wednesday evening, West Coast launch of another 24 satellites for its Starlink internet service. Liftoff of the Starlink 17-45 mission from Space Launch Complex 4E at Vandenberg Space Force Base in California is scheduled for 8:19 p.m. PDT (11:19 p.m. EDT / 0319 UTC). Spaceflight Now will have live coverage of the launch starting about 30 minutes prior to launch. The 24 Starlink V2 Mini satellites will be propelled on a south-southwesterly trajectory from Vandenberg atop Falcon 9 first stage B1081, making its 25th flight. The booster will return to a landing on the drone ship 'Of Course I Still Love You' about 8.5 minutes after launch, with deployment of the satellites from the second stage occurring just over an hour into flight. California has become home to SpaceX's workhorse launch pad in 2026 with the company's decision to focus more on Starship operations at Cape Canaveral. Wednesday's mission is the seventh of eight launches SpaceX plans from Vandenberg in June, compared with six planned Florida launches this month. Although it has two launch pads at Cape Canaveral, SpaceX is only launching Falcon 9 rockets from Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station and is dedicating Launch Complex 39A at the Kennedy Space Center for Falcon Heavy missions so construction of its first East Coast Starship facility at 39A can continue with fewer interruptions. Also, SpaceX announced in April it was repurposing one of its two East Coast Falcon 9 droneships, 'Just Read the Instructions', for transporting Starship components from Starbase to Florida. If the current schedule holds, SpaceX will have launched 40 missions from Vandenberg versus 37 from Cape Canaveral in the first half of 2026. The launch of the Starlink 17-28 mission on June 21 set a new turnaround for the pad at Space Launch Complex 4E, occurring about 56 hours after the previous flight. So fast was the turnaround that the booster for that previous mission, NROL-179, which landed back at Vandenberg, was still visible at the landing zone.
Should You Forget Tesla and Buy SpaceX Instead?
The two companies obviously have a lot in common, and it goes beyond having Elon Musk as their CEO. The reality is that they are both stocks valued and bought today, not for their current earnings, but for what they could become in the future. However, there are key differences between the investment profiles of Tesla(NASDAQ: TSLA) and Space Exploration Technologies(NASDAQ: SPCX), better known as SpaceX, that make them suitable for different types of investors and also challenge the notion that folding Tesla into SpaceX is a good idea. Three key differences between Tesla and SpaceX The major factors to consider are as follows: * Tesla's projects (electric vehicles, robotaxis, and Optimus robots) embody artificial intelligence (AI). At the same time, SpaceX is largely dependent on end demand for AI, not least for its xAI business and its orbital data center ambitions. * The scaling of Tesla's long-term recurring income drivers, namely robotaxis and Optimus are, despite the delays and previously over-optimistic assumptions articulated by Musk, much closer to near-term fruition than SpaceX's. * The two companies have vastly different medium-term capital expenditure requirements and cash flow profiles, with SpaceX requiring significantly more investment. Putting these points together, it's clear that, while both are growth stocks and priced as such, Tesla is less risky than SpaceX and has a shorter time horizon before it starts scaling earnings and cash flow. That's not to argue that Tesla is necessarily the better stock, but rather to point out that they will suit different types of investors. Capital expenditure requirements and cash flow The chart below shows the Wall Street consensus on capital spending. It implies that SpaceX will put more into capital expenditures than it generates in revenue in 2026 and will still be at a whopping 40% of revenue in 2030. Meanwhile, Tesla's relative capital spending is expected to decline as revenue grows and its phase of significant investment in securing its supply chain moderates. Tesla is investing heavily right now to build a lithium refinery and a lithium battery production plant, and is beginning to produce the Cybercab, Semi, and Optimus. Tesla's catalysts are near-term Investors can be forgiven for growing restless given the timing of Tesla's key initiatives (robotaxis/Cybercab and Optimus); the reality is that they are much closer to fruition than orbital data centers. For example, Tesla is taking a very cautious approach to ramping the robotaxi rollout. On the last earnings call, Musk made it clear that "it wouldn't be right for us to go to like very large scale unsupervised FSD when we know that there are software improvements in the pipeline that would improve safety." Those improvements are likely to come with v15 of its full self-driving (FSD) software due in late 2026 or early 2027. That's when investors can start to expect a significant and "very large scale" rollout. Still, it's a lot closer than SpaceX's orbital data centers. SpaceX expects to deploy them in 2028, but as clearly stated in the initial public offering (IPO) registration filing, "the timeline for certain of our initiatives involving unproven or new innovations, including our goal of deploying 100 gigawatts of annual compute power to orbit ... may be difficult or impossible to determine." A different kind of AI company As previously discussed in more detail, Tesla's solutions embody AI, making it one of the most exciting ways to play on the growth of AI capability. While SpaceX also benefits from these trends, it's much more dependent on the growth in AI applications. If demand slows, it could "result in existing terrestrial data centers sufficiently meeting such demand, thereby reducing the need for our orbital AI compute infrastructure," according to SpaceX filings. Which stock is better? Ultimately, the decision boils down to your risk profile, level of confidence in the growth of AI applications, and willingness to wait for each company's growth catalysts to come to fruition. Those differences in investment profiles also make a potential merger somewhat problematic, as Tesla investors will be swapping the likelihood of a ramp in recurring cash flows from robotaxis and Optimus for the prospect of those cash flows being reinvested to support long-term growth in SpaceX's existing businesses. That might not suit most Tesla investors unless the acquisition price is a significant premium. Lee Samaha has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Tesla. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
Should You Forget Tesla and Buy SpaceX Instead? - AOL
The two companies obviously have a lot in common, and it goes beyond having Elon Musk as their CEO. The reality is that they are both stocks valued and bought today, not for their current earnings, but for what they could become in the future. However, there are key differences between the investment profiles of Tesla(NASDAQ: TSLA) and Space Exploration Technologies(NASDAQ: SPCX), better known as SpaceX, that make them suitable for different types of investors and also challenge the notion that folding Tesla into SpaceX is a good idea. Where to invest $1,000 right now? Our analyst team just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks to buy right now, when you join Stock Advisor. See the stocks " && Image source: Getty Images. Three key differences between Tesla and SpaceX The major factors to consider are as follows: Putting these points together, it's clear that, while both are growth stocks and priced as such, Tesla is less risky than SpaceX and has a shorter time horizon before it starts scaling earnings and cash flow. That's not to argue that Tesla is necessarily the better stock, but rather to point out that they will suit different types of investors. Capital expenditure requirements and cash flow The chart below shows the Wall Street consensus on capital spending. It implies that SpaceX will put more into capital expenditures than it generates in revenue in 2026 and will still be at a whopping 40% of revenue in 2030. Meanwhile, Tesla's relative capital spending is expected to decline as revenue grows and its phase of significant investment in securing its supply chain moderates. Tesla is investing heavily right now to build a lithium refinery and a lithium battery production plant, and is beginning to produce the Cybercab, Semi, and Optimus. Data source: S&P Global Market Intelligence. Wall Street consensus. Chart by the author. Tesla's catalysts are near-term Investors can be forgiven for growing restless given the timing of Tesla's key initiatives (robotaxis/Cybercab and Optimus); the reality is that they are much closer to fruition than orbital data centers. For example, Tesla is taking a very cautious approach to ramping the robotaxi rollout. On the last earnings call, Musk made it clear that "it wouldn't be right for us to go to like very large scale unsupervised FSD when we know that there are software improvements in the pipeline that would improve safety." Those improvements are likely to come with v15 of its full self-driving (FSD) software due in late 2026 or early 2027. Image source: Tesla. That's when investors can start to expect a significant and "very large scale" rollout. Still, it's a lot closer than SpaceX's orbital data centers. SpaceX expects to deploy them in 2028, but as clearly stated in the initial public offering (IPO) registration filing, "the timeline for certain of our initiatives involving unproven or new innovations, including our goal of deploying 100 gigawatts of annual compute power to orbit ... may be difficult or impossible to determine." A different kind of AI company As previously discussed in more detail, Tesla's solutions embody AI, making it one of the most exciting ways to play on the growth of AI capability. While SpaceX also benefits from these trends, it's much more dependent on the growth in AI applications. If demand slows, it could "result in existing terrestrial data centers sufficiently meeting such demand, thereby reducing the need for our orbital AI compute infrastructure," according to SpaceX filings. Which stock is better? Ultimately, the decision boils down to your risk profile, level of confidence in the growth of AI applications, and willingness to wait for each company's growth catalysts to come to fruition. Those differences in investment profiles also make a potential merger somewhat problematic, as Tesla investors will be swapping the likelihood of a ramp in recurring cash flows from robotaxis and Optimus for the prospect of those cash flows being reinvested to support long-term growth in SpaceX's existing businesses. That might not suit most Tesla investors unless the acquisition price is a significant premium. Don't miss this second chance at a potentially lucrative opportunity Ever feel like you missed the boat in buying the most successful stocks? Then you'll want to hear this. On rare occasions, our expert team of analysts issues a "Double Down" stock recommendation for companies that they think are about to pop. If you're worried you've already missed your chance to invest, now is the best time to buy before it's too late. And the numbers speak for themselves: Right now, we're issuing "Double Down" alerts for three incredible companies, available when you joinStock Advisor, and there may not be another chance like this anytime soon. See the 3 stocks " *Stock Advisor returns as of June 24, 2026. && Lee Samaha has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Tesla. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
Anthropic's Mythos model found vulnerabilities in classified US government systems, official says
WASHINGTON (AP) -- A U.S. official told The Associated Press on Tuesday that one of Anthropic's artificial intelligence models had identified vulnerabilities in highly sensitive and secure U.S. government computer systems during a testing exercise. The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the matter, said Anthropic had teamed up with U.S. intelligence agencies to conduct tests using the company's Mythos model. It had identified certain vulnerabilities within hours, but that does not mean the model was able to exploit them within that time, the official said. The official said the testing was done through an Anthropic initiative called Project Glasswing, which brought together tech giants and other companies in hopes of securing the world's critical software from "severe" fallout that the Mythos model could pose to public safety, national security and the economy. Democratic Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia had briefly mentioned the testing during a June 11 hearing before the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Warner had said, "This tool broke into almost all of our classified systems, not in weeks but in hours." He attributed the information to the head of the National Security Agency and U.S. Cyber Command, who is Gen. Joshua Rudd. The NSA declined to comment on the matter in an email. An Anthropic spokesman also declined to comment. Despite the recent cooperation between Anthropic and U.S. agencies to test for vulnerabilities, tensions between the California company and the Trump administration have been growing. Anthropic has raised concerns over how the U.S. military would use its AI, while the administration has restricted the use of some of Anthropic's models. The administration issued a directive earlier this month requiring Anthropic to prevent foreign nationals from using its latest artificial intelligence models, known as Fable 5 and Mythos 5. Anthropic released Fable widely earlier this month. That model is a limited version of the more advanced Mythos, to which the company has tightly limited access due to cybersecurity fears. The directive came 10 days after President Donald Trump signed an executive order to establish a framework for the federal government to vet the national security risks of the most advanced AI systems for up to a month before their public release. Participation by AI developers would be voluntary, the order said. Anthropic said it disabled the models for all of its customers to comply with the administration's directive. The AI giant said it did not believe the steps taken by the government were warranted by the concern it flagged about a potential security issue. A group of cybersecurity executives has also asked the Trump administration to lift its directive, saying the move could help U.S. adversaries more than it hurts them. More than 100 cybersecurity experts and leaders from companies including Adobe and Nvidia told the government in a letter that Anthropic's Mythos models are "quite good" at finding flaws in software and weaponizing exploits -- but they are "not uniquely good at these tasks." Many of the letter's signatories said they regularly use other foundation and open-source models for security audits and training. The letter said it is dangerous to take away the best cyber defense capabilities "without a good reason" when America's adversaries are rapidly advancing.
Anthropic's Mythos model found vulnerabilities in classified US government systems, official says
WASHINGTON (AP) -- A U.S. official told The Associated Press on Tuesday that one of Anthropic's artificial intelligence models had identified vulnerabilities in highly sensitive and secure U.S. government computer systems during a testing exercise. The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the matter, said Anthropic had teamed up with U.S. intelligence agencies to conduct tests using the company's Mythos model. It had identified certain vulnerabilities within hours, but that does not mean the model was able to exploit them within that time, the official said. The official said the testing was done through an Anthropic initiative called Project Glasswing, which brought together tech giants and other companies in hopes of securing the world's critical software from "severe" fallout that the Mythos model could pose to public safety, national security and the economy. Democratic Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia had briefly mentioned the testing during a June 11 hearing before the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Warner had said, "This tool broke into almost all of our classified systems, not in weeks but in hours." He attributed the information to the head of the National Security Agency and U.S. Cyber Command, who is Gen. Joshua Rudd. The NSA declined to comment on the matter in an email. An Anthropic spokesman also declined to comment. Despite the recent cooperation between Anthropic and U.S. agencies to test for vulnerabilities, tensions between the California company and the Trump administration have been growing. Anthropic has raised concerns over how the U.S. military would use its AI, while the administration has restricted the use of some of Anthropic's models. The administration issued a directive earlier this month requiring Anthropic to prevent foreign nationals from using its latest artificial intelligence models, known as Fable 5 and Mythos 5. Anthropic released Fable widely earlier this month. That model is a limited version of the more advanced Mythos, to which the company has tightly limited access due to cybersecurity fears. The directive came 10 days after President Donald Trump signed an executive order to establish a framework for the federal government to vet the national security risks of the most advanced AI systems for up to a month before their public release. Participation by AI developers would be voluntary, the order said. Anthropic said it disabled the models for all of its customers to comply with the administration's directive. The AI giant said it did not believe the steps taken by the government were warranted by the concern it flagged about a potential security issue. A group of cybersecurity executives has also asked the Trump administration to lift its directive, saying the move could help U.S. adversaries more than it hurts them. More than 100 cybersecurity experts and leaders from companies including Adobe and Nvidia told the government in a letter that Anthropic's Mythos models are "quite good" at finding flaws in software and weaponizing exploits -- but they are "not uniquely good at these tasks." Many of the letter's signatories said they regularly use other foundation and open-source models for security audits and training. The letter said it is dangerous to take away the best cyber defense capabilities "without a good reason" when America's adversaries are rapidly advancing.
Anthropic's Mythos model found vulnerabilities in classified US government systems, official says
WASHINGTON (AP) -- A U.S. official told The Associated Press on Tuesday that one of Anthropic's artificial intelligence models had identified vulnerabilities in highly sensitive and secure U.S. government computer systems during a testing exercise. The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the matter, said Anthropic had teamed up with U.S. intelligence agencies to conduct tests using the company's Mythos model. It had identified certain vulnerabilities within hours, but that does not mean the model was able to exploit them within that time, the official said. The official said the testing was done through an Anthropic initiative called Project Glasswing, which brought together tech giants and other companies in hopes of securing the world's critical software from "severe" fallout that the Mythos model could pose to public safety, national security and the economy. Democratic Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia had briefly mentioned the testing during a June 11 hearing before the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Warner had said, "This tool broke into almost all of our classified systems, not in weeks but in hours." He attributed the information to the head of the National Security Agency and U.S. Cyber Command, who is Gen. Joshua Rudd. The NSA declined to comment on the matter in an email. An Anthropic spokesman also declined to comment. Despite the recent cooperation between Anthropic and U.S. agencies to test for vulnerabilities, tensions between the California company and the Trump administration have been growing. Anthropic has raised concerns over how the U.S. military would use its AI, while the administration has restricted the use of some of Anthropic's models. The administration issued a directive earlier this month requiring Anthropic to prevent foreign nationals from using its latest artificial intelligence models, known as Fable 5 and Mythos 5. Anthropic released Fable widely earlier this month. That model is a limited version of the more advanced Mythos, to which the company has tightly limited access due to cybersecurity fears. The directive came 10 days after President Donald Trump signed an executive order to establish a framework for the federal government to vet the national security risks of the most advanced AI systems for up to a month before their public release. Participation by AI developers would be voluntary, the order said. Anthropic said it disabled the models for all of its customers to comply with the administration's directive. The AI giant said it did not believe the steps taken by the government were warranted by the concern it flagged about a potential security issue. A group of cybersecurity executives has also asked the Trump administration to lift its directive, saying the move could help U.S. adversaries more than it hurts them. More than 100 cybersecurity experts and leaders from companies including Adobe and Nvidia told the government in a letter that Anthropic's Mythos models are "quite good" at finding flaws in software and weaponizing exploits -- but they are "not uniquely good at these tasks." Many of the letter's signatories said they regularly use other foundation and open-source models for security audits and training. The letter said it is dangerous to take away the best cyber defense capabilities "without a good reason" when America's adversaries are rapidly advancing.
