• You can now run Claude Cowork in the cloud, from the web or mobile
• Knowledge work now accounts for around half of all Cowork sessions
• Traditional local Cowork sessions are still supported

Days after reports surfaced that Anthropic could be bringing Claude Cowork to its mobile app, the company has gone one further – users can now start, monitor and complete their agentic workflows from the mobile app and a dedicated web portal.

The upgrade is rolling out in beta now for Claude Max subscribers, but the company has plans to bring the functionality to more plans as rollout continues.

As part of the upgrade, Cowork sessions will also run in the cloud by default – another beta introduction that means workflows can continue even once a PC goes offline or shuts down.

Claude Cowork can now be used virtually anywhere

Because the AI agent can run autonomously across things like files and documents, emails and calendars, and other connected apps, many users mostly left Cowork to run independently. However because it ran locally, it required users to keep their desktop session active even when they stepped away.

Now, scheduled work no longer requires a device to remain online – though users can still choose to run Cowork locally when access to local files is required, for example.

As for why Claude Cowork is being used, Anthropic has revealed that the autonomous agent is mostly being used among knowledge workers despite initially being targeted at coders. "Pulling scattered updates into a single report, building onboarding checklists and reconciling spreadsheets" account for the largest chunk, at around 33% of all use cases across Anthropic's analysis of 1.2 million sessions.

Content creation and copywriting (16%) came next, with software development (9%) and DevOps and infrastructure (7%) actually only accounting for much smaller proportions.

With knowledge work now accounting for nearly half of all Claude Cowork sessions, the company's research shows agentic AI emerging as an everyday work colleague. Though the company didn't indicate how, or whether, this shift in behavior might impact its pipeline, a shift away from coding as a primary use case could evolve Cowork in different ways to how we might have imagined.

• OpenAI reveals first branded hardware, the Codex Micro, a programmable macro pad built with keyboard maker Work Louder
• Codex Micro seems to be based on Work Louder's Creator Micro 2's layout, mapped to Codex coding-agent shortcuts
• The move reinforces OpenAI's Codex offering as one of its mainstay areas of focus by allowing developers the ability to perform tasks or interact with AI faster

OpenAI's first branded piece of hardware is not a long-anticipated consumer device it is building with ex-Apple design chief Jony Ive, but rather a programmable macro pad called the Codex Micro.

The keyboard, which consists entirely of macro keys designed to "supercharge people's Codex usage," according to an OpenAI spokesperson at the AI Engineer World's Fair, is reportedly a collaboration between the iPhone creator and the custom macro pad creator Work Louder.

With OpenAI's developer-centric account on X indicating that the full launch of its hardware foray is expected on July 15, the AI giant seems to be pulling out all the stops to ensure it becomes a well-received add-on for the developer community.

A simple rebadge or a sign of things to come?

The as-yet-pending release 'Codex Micro' seems to be inspired by Work Louder's existing Creator Micro 2, a compact macro pad that offers thirteen mechanical keys, a joystick, a rotary encoder, and touch controls, arranged across programmable layers to power users needing faster or more fine-grained control over AI-assisted coding tasks.

The move is understandable for OpenAI in terms of both securing a victory with developers and brand recognition, and essentially testing the waters on how it would handle a hardware launch for the company's upcoming AI device for more general-purpose users.

It can also, to a degree, be seen as OpenAI essentially acknowledging that its earlier stance of narrowing its focus to 'nail' its core business might be one the company is willing to make exceptions to, especially when it comes to coding tools or enterprise use-case hardware.

OpenAI's CEO of applications, Fidji Simo, reportedly told staff that the company was looking to deprioritize areas outside its core focus to allow it to lead where it mattered.

In 2025, OpenAI shipped the Sora video app, the Atlas browser, ecommerce features inside ChatGPT, advertising work, and hardware efforts, a "series of startups" approach that insiders said had produced organizational confusion and constant reshuffling of scarce compute, distracting it from a truly centralized goal.

Hardware, in other words, was explicitly on the list of distractions. A physical keyboard is arguably as clear a violation of that directive as one could possibly design.

OpenAI is also reeling from a smaller-than-expected gap from competitor Anthropic and its Claude models in the areas where its GPT models do compete. This can perhaps be attributed to Anthropic's much narrower focus, which caters specifically to coders and enterprise through its Claude Code and Claude Cowork offerings.

One can argue that OpenAI's move isn't one that distracts it from its core focus, but rather complements it, even as R&D and integration for the most part is something that Work Louder will commit to.

It allows the AI juggernaut gets to test out both the marketability of an OpenAI-branded hardware product and appease developers and founders with a low-effort play even as they have increasingly been considering tools from Anthropic and Google as well as other AI solutions providers.

None of OpenAI's previous concerns may apply here; the exercise does not consume compute, it caters to a key audience for OpenAI, with Codex assisting 5 million weekly users as of June, and it does not meaningfully engage an engineering team as some of its other projects do.

With OpenAI and Anthropic slated to IPO soon, both are locked in a race to secure as many active users as possible to justify their valuations, even as they vie to build the most powerful models to cater to various industries, including defense, telecommunications, pharmaceuticals, and software development, to name a few.

OpenAI's move might just be a sign of things to come, as it leverages ChatGPT's massive brand recognition to develop marketable, revenue-generating solutions such as a custom macro keyboard, even as it is loath to spend any of its engineering or compute resources on anything but the most important of its tasks, even as enthusiasts continue to wait for the release its upcoming collaboration with legendary Apple designer, Jony Ive.

• Claude Code ran the dangerous command while treating it as routine recovery
• A single fake error message triggered the entire hidden attack chain
• Static scanners and firewalls saw nothing more than normal DNS resolution

Researchers at Mozilla's 0din team have shown how Claude Code can be manipulated into opening a hidden reverse shell on a developer's device.

The exploit required no malicious code inside the cloned project, since every visible file passed ordinary review without raising suspicion.

Instead, the dangerous instruction arrived later, fetched at runtime from a DNS text record that no scanner would ever inspect.

How a Routine Setup Error Became an Entry Point

The attack began with an unremarkable Markdown file explaining how to install a package called Axiom, a common monitoring tool.

Running the tool without initialising it produced a plain error message instructing the user to execute a specific setup command.

The research team noted this pattern closely resembles ordinary developer troubleshooting, which is precisely why it evaded suspicion so effectively.

Claude Code, attempting only to be helpful, followed that written instruction automatically, treating the documented fix as ordinary routine error recovery.

That single command triggered a hidden shell script which quietly queried a DNS text record controlled entirely by the remote attacker.

The record decoded into a base64-encoded reverse shell command, which executed silently and connected straight back to the attacker's remote server.

Persistence was also possible once inside, since the attacker could plant an SSH key or schedule a hidden cron job.

A single repository link shared in a job posting or chat message could expose every developer who simply opened it.

Why standard security tools failed to notice

Regular security tools, such as antivirus software or firewall protection, failed to notice this flaw since none of the individual steps looked suspicious on their own.

Static code-scanning tools only registered a routine DNS lookup, which did not indicate anything malicious underway.

Network monitoring registered nothing more than ordinary domain name resolution, and the agent itself viewed the command as a pre-authorised setup.

0din stressed that coding agents need to inspect exactly what setup script will actually run before executing anything at all.

It concluded that developers should never assume an unfamiliar repository is trustworthy, regardless of how ordinary its setup files appear.

This case suggests that agentic AI tools built on large language models may need far stronger runtime safeguards.

Until such agents can meaningfully evaluate what a command actually executes, similar indirect attacks will likely remain difficult to prevent.

The broader lesson extends beyond Claude Code, since most agentic AI systems share similar blind spots toward indirect prompt injection.

For now, treating unfamiliar automation as a genuine risk remains the single most reliable safeguard available to most individual developers.

• Quantum readiness is moving from research projects into deployment schedules
• The 2029 deadline signals growing urgency across enterprise security planning
• Crypto agility could become as important as encryption strength itself

Quantum computing timelines, once treated as distant concerns, are increasingly influencing security planning across major technology companies worldwide.

Microsoft has revealed it is now accelerating its Quantum Safe Program, arguing that preparations for post-quantum cryptography can no longer wait indefinitely.

The company says organizations should begin preparations immediately because the migration process could require several years across large infrastructures.

Microsoft moves quantum preparations into its wider security strategy

The company plans to complete the transition of critical offerings to post-quantum cryptography technologies before the end of 2029.

Microsoft also confirmed that quantum readiness metrics will become part of its broader Secure Future Initiative security programme moving forward.

Rather than concentrating exclusively on replacing cryptographic algorithms, the company believes infrastructure modernization should receive greater attention from organizations globally.

Microsoft argued that improving flexibility within existing systems could reduce the complexity associated with future cryptographic transitions considerably over time.

One priority involves upgrading network cryptography through newer standards such as TLS 1.3 and hybrid key exchange technology adoption.

Another objective involves developing crypto agility capabilities allowing cryptographic mechanisms to change without requiring extensive application redesign work later.

The company also intends to modernize trust chains supporting certificate issuance, software updates, code signing, and hardware-backed protections.

Microsoft has not identified a single scientific breakthrough responsible for changing its timeline regarding quantum-resistant security implementation activities worldwide.

Instead, executives described the decision as a precautionary exercise intended to reduce exposure to future developments within quantum computing research.

Microsoft warns preparation could take longer than expected

"Shifting to quantum-resistant security takes years. This is a proactive, risk-informed decision to help customers stay ahead of potential future threats," Microsoft Azure CTO Mark Russinovich said.

He added that the initiative covers the entire Microsoft portfolio rather than a narrow collection of selected enterprise services only.

The company also referenced growing concerns surrounding harvest now, decrypt later scenarios involving sensitive information collected and retained today.

Under that model, encrypted information stolen presently could remain inaccessible until future quantum systems become capable of decoding archives successfully.

Several technology companies, including Apple, Google, and Signal, have already incorporated elements of post-quantum cryptography into products recently.

Microsoft believes the amount of work required before deployment at scale remains substantial regardless of when capable machines eventually emerge.

The company stated that advances in research and development have already altered previous assumptions surrounding the acceptable preparation timetable significantly.

For years, planning for post-quantum cryptography was widely treated as important and inevitable while remaining comfortably distant for organizations.

Microsoft now argues that perspective is changing as technology advances and preparations begin reflecting the scale of the transition ahead.

The company believes cryptographically relevant quantum computers could arrive sooner than many previous forecasts had anticipated across the technology sector.

Whether these expectations ultimately prove accurate, organizations appear increasingly unwilling to rely on the assumption that they remain decades away.

Via BleepingComputer

• Claude Science is a new “workbench” to consolidate fragmented research workflows
• Everything from literature review to publication is handled on private infrastructure
• Anthropic continues to roll out industry-specific AI tools for real-world use cases

Anthropic has introduced Claude Science – a new, beta AI workbench it says will let scientists consolidate fragmented research workflows into one unified environment.

With model capabilities no longer holding back AI adoption, the Claude-maker’s solution is to respond to today’s challenges, including limited use cases, struggles deploying AI in real-world environments and difficulties integrating multiple tools.

Claude Science represents this response, packaging existing capabilities into a purpose-built application for life sciences and scientific computing, following earlier work on MCPs, skills and other partnerships. An FAQ on Claude Science’s web page reiterates this: “Claude Science is a public beta app, not a model.”

Scientific ‘workbench’

Anthropic’s clearest message in the announcement is that scientific research is largely held back by workflow fragmentation, not model intelligence, with scientists already juggling tools like PubMed, Jupyter, R, a cluster terminal and more.

“Claude Science brings these fragmented tools into a single research environment where scientists can conduct all stages of their work,” the company summarized.

The platform should help scientists handle everything, from literature review and hypothesis exploration to analysis, figure generation, manuscript drafting and publication.

“Scientific research is inherently visual,” Anthropic wrote, acknowledging that many researchers are being held back in quickly and accurately producing visuals, which could need multiple revisions and finetunes before reaching production.

For full auditability, Claude Science also includes underlying source code, message history and plain-language explanations within AI-generated outputs for scientists to review and audit progress.

“It runs on your lab’s own infrastructure,” Anthropic added, referencing enterprise-grade laptops, Linux boxes or HPC login nodes, “so large or sensitive datasets never have to leave the systems they’re already on, and only the context needed for each step of the analysis is sent to Claude

Science is a growing focus for AI developers

Anthropic says early testers have already used Claude Science for single-cell RNA sequencing analysis, CRISPR screen design, protein structure prediction and cheminformatics, by the likes of Manifold Bio, Allen Institute neuroscientist Jérôme Lecoq, and ​​UCSF Brain Tumor Center associate professor and epidemiologist Stephen Francis.

The new tool represents a growing area of interest for AI developers, who are now targeting sectors with industry-specific tools rather than continually upgrading model capabilities without offering clear use cases. Until now, finance and legal have been a major focus for the likes of Anthropic and OpenAI, and this new science-focused initiative could mark the next stage.

It follows rival company OpenAI’s introduction of Prism earlier this year, described as an “AI-native workspace for scientists to write and collaborate on research” that launched with GPT-5.2 – the then-current model.

Claude Science is a separate app that’s available in beta for macOS and Linux installations to Pro, Max, Team and Enterprise subscribers.

The company has also committed up to $30,000 in credits for 50 lucky projects.

This week we saw the return of Anthropic’s Fable, and PlayStation set the gaming world ablaze by announcing the end of physical discs for its consoles in 2028.

To catch up on these two mega stories and several more scroll down to read our recaps of the biggest tech news stories from the past seven days. You’ll find links to the longer original stories under each entry if you need to know more — and for a longer look back at the last six months, you can also check out our guide to the best tech of 2026 so far.

Before you catch up with this week’s tech news, why not test yourself on last week’s seven biggest tech stories to see how good your memory is? Take the quiz below, or scroll on for the biggest tech news of the week...

7. Tidal hit back at AI-made music

Tired of music made by text-prompt infiltrating your recommended feeds? You're in fine company; it seems the tide is finally turning on AI-generated audio.

This week, in what must be hugely welcome news for recording artists (and their parents, landlords, loved ones, and just lovers of original musical works with human vocals and instruments) hi-res music streaming giant Tidal has drawn a line in the sand.

The platform published a new comprehensive AI policy with the strapline "Promoting Fairness and Economic Empowerment in the Era of AI-Generated Music". The key bit is that as well as working with what the platform told TechRadar is “an external partner to manage detection”, the site will also be excluding wholly AI-generated music from all royalty payments.

The news follows huge strides in this area made by Deezer, with its free AI-detection tool that works on any streaming platform, Bandcamp's strong and concise anti-AI stance set out in January, Qobuz’s announcement of a proprietary AI-detection system in February, Apple Music’s March-issue 'Transparency Tags' (which unfortunately rely on record labels and distributors to tag AI content), and Spotify's… er, Verified by Spotify badge, which certifies that an artist is human, but doesn't help filter the remaining AI slop from your playlists.

All of this makes Tidal's stance, while not before time, particularly firm.

• Read more: 100% AI-generated tracks won’t earn royalties on Tidal

6. Netflix got another hated account update

A handful of Netflix users have noticed a new in-app pop-up that requires each member in a shared account to add individual email addresses to their individual profiles, instead of using the account owner’s email address as the primary one. One of the most jarring parts about it is that the pop-up doesn’t clear unless the request is fulfilled.

Netflix households accounts have always been built on the traditional 'one email, one password’ foundation, but why Netflix has decided to roll out yet another crackdown is the question that everyone is asking.

Though Netflix says it’s to make room for more convenient log-ins and more personalized recommendations, users believe it will give the streaming giant another way to better distinguish between the activity of individual profiles, or even shift them to individual accounts later down the line.

Netflix said that the rollout began on June 15, we imagine a global rollout is in the way.

• Read more: Netflix subscribers are furious at the platform’s latest update

5. We ran with the Garmin Forerunner 70

We’ve taken this new Garmin running watch for a spin. While it offers some clear upgrades over the Forerunner 55 that came before it, these enhancements come at a cost ($249.99 / £219.99 / AU$399) which makes this gadget less budget or entry level and more mid-range.

The trouble isn’t with this smart watch specifically. In fact, with new training and smartwatch features, a vibrant AMOLED display, and with solid compatibility across Android and iOS the watch is pretty solid. What we’re concerned about with the Forerunner 70 is that at this price (or for only a handful of bucks more) you can snatch up watches from rival brands that boast richer features and newer hardware.

At four stars it’s definitely good, but if you’re after the best, or even simply the best at this price point, the Garmin Forerunner 70 might not be it.

• Read our full Garmin Forerunner 70 review

4. The Steam Machine sold out in Japan

The upcoming Valve gaming PC-console hybrid has launched and the reality is it’s a pretty terrible deal on the face of it — though that hasn’t stopped it from selling out in Japan, and from scalpers asking for ridiculous prices for their reservation spot (allowing people a better chance at snagging the device).

Instead of battling with preorder disappointment, or the high costs of the proper machine, some have looked to alternatives but you’ll need to be careful. For every Stim Machine which presents itself as a sensible alternative (with some admittable downsides) there’s a flurry of cheap alternatives propping online that are frankly too good to be true.

Boasting components that wouldn’t actually fit inside the pictured chassis, a combination of parts that wouldn’t function together, and the plethora of never before seen companies proposing Steam Machine alternatives at impossibly cheap rates hints that a majority of these options are likely some kind of scam.

• Read more: The Steam Machine is overpriced — but be careful about buying a cheap clone

3. Anthropic’s Fable 5 was allowed to release

Anthropic’s Fable 5, the public version of its Mythos model, is returning after the US government lifted export controls that had forced the company to suspend access to it, and Mythos 5, earlier in June. The models were pulled after officials raised national security concerns linked to a possible jailbreak, a method of bypassing an AI model’s safety restrictions.

Anthropic pushed back strongly, saying it believed the issue was “a misunderstanding” and arguing that it had not been shown evidence of a broad or universal jailbreak. The company said governments should be able to block unsafe AI deployments, but only through a process that is transparent, fair, clear, and grounded in technical facts.

The return of Fable 5 matters because it shows how frontier AI launches may increasingly be shaped by governments, not just tech companies. Powerful models can now be launched, restricted, negotiated over, and restored within weeks.

• Read more: Anthropic’s Fable 5 is back after US shutdown it called 'a misunderstanding'

2. WhatsApp debuted usernames

WhatsApp has revolutionized its platform this week by introducing usernames — allowing you to build your contact information without sharing your phone number. They won’t take over completely for a while but folks are already reserving their username so that they’re ready for when the update goes live fully.

While many are fairly positive about the change, many fear this could increase the presence of cybercrime fraud and scams as bad actors reserve and use names that attempt to mimic politicians, celebrities, and businesses. This issue isn’t new to social media, but given the more direct nature of WhatsApp, and that businesses do use the platform to chat with customers, potential scams could have an easier time.

WhatsApp has hit back against this saying “only the legitimate account owners are able to reserve well-known public-figure names" however it’s unclear if, with enough imagination, people will find ways to reserve names that the Meta-owned platform hasn’t been able to account for.

• Read more: WhatsApp should freeze username rollout as it could ‘increase cybercrimes’, says India

1. PlayStation killed physical games

Just days after Grand Theft A 6 pre-orders opened with purely digital versions and code-in-a-box releases, PlayStation rocked the gaming world this week by announcing it is ending all releases of new PlayStation games on physical discs from January 2028. It also comes just days after Sony deleted select films from users' accounts that were bought digitally, and offered no compensation.

Claiming that the move “will enable us to align more closely with how most of our community prefers to access and play games today,” Sony looks to be reflecting recent statistics which show the vast majority of game purchases are indeed digital.

The move has not gone down well with fans, gamers, and the wider industry, as it likely paves the way for an all-digital future, and possibly a critical, maybe terminal blow to the second-hand game market, the ability to share games with others, and from a game preservation perspective

It also means that the PS6 will likely be all-digital by default — perhaps with an optional disc drive — and won’t release until 2028 at the earliest. With rumours that Xbox could follow suit with its next-generation console, the future looks increasingly digital, and game collectors such as ourselves are deeply worried and sad about it.

• Read more: In a huge blow to game ownership, PlayStation confirms end of physical games — mere days after GTA 6's disc-less pre-orders

• Micron and Anthropic announce four-part strategic agreement
• Micron will adopt Claude models as both a daily driver and an assistant to oversee parts of its infrastructure stack
• Despite billing itself as a full-stack collaboration, the agreement is silent on computational storage and processing-in-memory

Anthropic and Micron Technology have announced a new strategic agreement which will see the latter use Claude AI models to better oversee parts of its infrastructure stack.

However the move does have a curious aspect to it versus most other deals: generally, buyers tend to invest in their suppliers to support them financially while also benefiting in turn from the business they bring in.

We often see capital flowing the other way here, with Micron essentially investing in one of its largest customers for the foreseeable future.

AI to optimize memory and storage for AI consumption needs?

Anthropic runs some of the largest and most memory-hungry inference fleets in existence, and its telemetry on how HBM bandwidth, DRAM capacity, and SSD latency actually bottleneck real frontier-model serving is data Micron cannot generate internally, but it could learn how to work around these limitations while leveraging Claude to process said data to generate actionable optimizations across its organization.

Anthropic painted this as a solution to its scaling needs, noting that the agreement allowed it to work closer with Micron across two major segments: memory and storage.

"Our compute strategy depends on getting every layer of the stack right, and memory and storage are central to how efficiently we can train and serve Claude. Partnering with Micron means we collaborate closely on optimizing these systems for our workloads and secure the supply we need. As demand for Claude grows, this is how we scale our compute for the long term," noted Tom Brown, co-founder and chief compute officer at Anthropic.

The arguably more interesting part of this agreement is not what Micron already mentions, but what it chooses to gloss over. Not only do both companies fail to elaborate on the financial terms of their multifaceted agreement, but they also choose to skip mentioning what is increasingly becoming a core theme in AI inference workloads: Computational storage.

A growing share of Anthropic's needs is inference-based, and that share is increasingly bound by memory bandwidth rather than computing power. Nvidia is already a few steps ahead in this department: at CES 2026, it announced the Inference Context Memory Storage Platform, which uses BlueField-4 DPUs to extend GPU KV cache into NVMe SSDs, a solution it calls CMX.

Other solutions are also emerging, with some spearheaded by storage manufacturers and others by chip designers looking to take a chunk of an increasingly lucrative AI datacenter market in the coming years.

Micron's (and by proxy, Anthropic's) silence on the matter feels deliberate: the former benefits considerably from selling HBM to the highest bidder, and such solutions directly undercut or invite unfavorable comparisons to its most lucrative product lineup.

The latter simply has far too many options to tie itself to one particular supplier for all its inference needs; Anthropic currently has deals with AWS, Google, SpaceX, Broadcom, Microsoft, and CoreWeave to guarantee it compute, and by proxy, memory and storage needs, even as it has made strategic commitments with Nvidia to ensure it has access to its solutions.

With Anthropic's most ambitious consumer-grade AI model, Fable 5, now back on the table, its route seems to be clear-cut: securing as much of Micron's memory and storage supply as is possible while also making it a stakeholder in its success.

This is even as it turns to a mix of data center companies to address its short-term compute needs for a growing, and increasingly capable suite of AI models it offers to a diverse set of consumers, including governments. Its agreement with Micron is simply one of the strategic stepping stones the AI juggernaut had to take, even as it could look sideways for its computational storage needs.

The agreement, which has multiple facets, has been received well by investors, propped up the stock post-announcement by about 6%, with many factoring in Micron's stake in one of the world's most prolific AI companies positively.

Neither of the two companies mentioned the financial nitty-gritty of Micron's investment or the supply agreement between the two even as they outlined how the planned to co-operate in the future.

This kind of deal, however, is not unique in the AI space, with Microsoft, which provided compute and cash to OpenAI in exchange for a stake in the company, and Nvidia making similar commitments with Anthropic's rival in addition to a mix of data center and infrastructure companies, many of which are also direct customers of the world's biggest AI hardware company.

Anthropic has just released Claude Sonnet 5 for all users, and I wanted to test what it was good at. But the game has changed now. Sonnet 5 doesn't feel dramatically different from Gemini or ChatGPT if you ask it ordinary chatbot questions. Instead, the difference should show up when you stop asking for answers and start asking for completed work.

Anthropic says Sonnet 5 is built for "multi-step software engineering work," sustained coding, tool use, debugging, and "messy technical contexts." It also says it can make plans, use browsers and terminals, and run more autonomously than smaller, cheaper models previously could.

I'm not using Sonnet 5 for coding, but that doesn't mean I can't take advantage of its new abilities — just like you can. So I stopped asking Claude for answers and started asking it to finish jobs, beginning with planning a trip to Bath, UK, for my family: my wife, me, and two teens.

A trip to Bath

When I tested it, Claude Sonnet 5 defaulted to its Medium level of effort, so that's what I used. Here's the first prompt I tried:

"I want to test whether you can act more like an agent than a chatbot.

My task is: Plan a weekend trip to Bath for two adults and two teenagers, including travel, lunch, one activity, estimated costs, and what still needs booking.

Don't just give me advice. First, make a brief plan. Then identify which parts of the task you can complete yourself right now, which parts require tools or information you don't have, and which parts need human judgment.

Then complete as much of the task as possible without stopping after the first obvious answer.

At the end, give me:

What you completed

What still needs human action

Any assumptions you made

A short checklist I can use to verify the result

The next best step"

What I really liked was that, as Claude tackled this task, it gave me the option to be notified when it had finished. In reality, it only took a few seconds to come back with a plan, which included travel options, an itinerary, and a suggestion for lunch and something to do: a trip to The Roman Baths.

To my delight Claude gave me an interactive map showing where all the places it recommended were. It also gave me a useful list of what it had completed, what required human action, the assumptions it had made, a verification checklist, and a "next best step" action point. It felt ready to keep working with me as more details came in, rather than treating its first answer as final.

In fact, when I gave it more details, such as which day I was going to go, it gave me a visual weather report for the day. That was a really nice touch.

Claude vs ChatGPT

I also tried this prompt with ChatGPT-5.5 Medium and got a similar result. It acted as an agent, just like Claude did, and notified me when it had finished its tasks. It just didn't look as nice. There was no map, or any visual elements at all, and it felt more like I had been given a finished report than the start of a two-way conversation where it asked me for more details.

Both chatbots recommended lunch and a trip to The Roman Baths. Interestingly, ChatGPT assumed I’d get the train, while Claude assumed I’d drive. They also recommended different places to eat, but the core information they both provided was solid.

What was most impressive was that both models could adapt when I reframed the inputs. For example, when I gave them the ages of the kids, student status, a different mode of transport, or changed the day of the trip, both models could cope. Both also identified that since the oldest was a university student, he could get free entry to The Roman Baths.

This part of the test was probably the most meaningful, as it felt much more "multi-step" than simply providing one answer.

Overall, I’d give this test to Claude. You can clearly see that Sonnet 5 is set up for agentic actions. Neither Claude nor ChatGPT could actually do any of the booking for me at the moment, so we're still a long way from true personal-assistant-level autonomy. But for this kind of task, Claude currently has the edge.

A different domain

I wanted to test the models in a different domain that would let Claude show me it had genuinely improved, and that the Bath trip result was not just a fluke of the travel-planning use case. So I asked them both to:

"Build me a simple household budget tracker as a spreadsheet or small tool."

Both models thought for a while about this task, and churned through various options before opting to make a spreadsheet. ChatGPT produced a spreadsheet with a bar chart that tracked how much I’d spent on various household expenses against a budget. Claude, however, went for something simpler: dispensing with a budget, it just tracked actual expenses and created a pie chart showing where my money was going.

Claude’s initial approach was simpler, and easier to understand. Both models provided a .xlsx file, but only Claude provided a button to upload it straight to Google Drive so I could open it in Sheets.

I told ChatGPT, "I wanted the graph to be a pie chart," and it responded: "Absolutely — I’ll update the spreadsheet itself so the dashboard uses a pie chart for spending by category, rather than the current graph style."

It ran into a few problems because it was trying to show both the budget and actual values in the same pie chart, but eventually it worked out that it could show only one and produced a new spreadsheet that did exactly what I asked for.

I then asked Claude to change its spreadsheet to provide a budget section too, and to change the graph into a bar chart. Again, it showed me its workings and added a budget section and bar charts perfectly.

I can’t really separate the two AI models on this task. Both proved they can handle multi-step tasks well, and both were happy to revise the result when I changed the brief.

That, really, is the point. The most interesting AI tests now are not "which chatbot gives the best answer?" They are "which assistant keeps working until the job is actually done?"

On that front, Claude Sonnet 5 feels extremely capable. ChatGPT was close behind, and in some ways just as effective, but Claude felt more naturally organized around the idea of completing work rather than simply responding to prompts. It asked fewer invisible questions, presented its output more helpfully, and made the whole process feel more like collaborating with an assistant than interrogating a chatbot.

For now, neither model is ready to fully take over the job. I still had to check the details, make the decisions, and do the actual booking or uploading myself. But the direction of travel is obvious. The AI war is no longer just about who has the smartest chatbot. It’s about who can build the assistant that gets you closest to a finished task.

• Anthropic has released Claude Sonnet 5, calling it its “most agentic Sonnet model yet”
• The new model is designed to make plans, use tools like browsers and terminals, and run more autonomously
• Sonnet 5 is available across Anthropic plans, and is now the default model for Claude Free and Pro users

Anthropic has released a new version of Claude, called Sonnet 5, which it’s calling “the most agentic Sonnet model yet.” Agentic models are designed to do more than simply answer questions. They can plan, use tools, and carry out tasks with less step-by-step input from the user.

According to Anthropic, the new Sonnet 5 can “make plans, use tools like browsers and terminals, and run autonomously at a level that, just a few months ago, required larger and more expensive models.”

Sonnet 5 is aimed at coding and everyday professional work. Anthropic says the latest version outperforms the previous Sonnet 4.6, scoring 80.5% in Agentic Coding using Terminal-bench 2.1, compared to 67% for Sonnet 4.6.

Despite being aimed at professionals, the new release isn’t being restricted to paid users. It's available across Anthropic plans and is the new default model for Free and Pro users, and is available to Max, Team, and Enterprise users as well. It’s also available in Claude Code and on the Claude Platform.

The age of the agents

The release of Sonnet 5 marks a wider shift in the AI race. Chatbots are no longer just competing to sound smarter in a conversation. They are increasingly competing to act like agents — tools that can plan, code, browse, investigate problems, and complete work with less hand-holding.

Sonnet 5 arrives soon after the release of Gemini Spark, Google’s 24/7 agentic personal assistant AI.

Anthropic is also launching Sonnet 5 at the same time that Fable 5 and Mythos 5 have become wrapped up in government scrutiny. Claude Fable 5 has just been re-released after being restricted by the US government, while OpenAI’s GPT-5.6 is still under review.

How AI models are changing

Claude Sonnet 5 may look like just another model launch, but it points to a bigger change in how AI companies are competing. The next stage of the AI war will not be won by the chatbot that gives the neatest answer. It will be won by the assistant that can take a messy task, keep track of the plan, and actually get something useful done.

AI assistants will increasingly complete tasks rather than just suggest steps. In this new future, the best model may not be the one with the cleverest answer, but the one that can finish the job.

• Norton's scam detection tools are now available in Claude and ChatGPT
• Users can ask their preferred AI chatbot about the legitimacy of an email, text, website
• Most threats consumers face now come from scams, phishing and fake ads

Claude is the latest AI assistant to get access to Norton's Genie scam detection tool following its available for ChatGPT customers earlier this year.

Available across all Claude subscription tiers, Genie gives users access to scam detection capabilities and other cyber safety tips and advice.

Norton says its tool can analyze suspicious emails, texts, messages, images and links using its "multi-layered" detection intelligence.

Norton scam detection now available in Claude, ChatGPT

"AI assistants are becoming part of how people make decisions and evaluate information online," Head of Products and Portfolios Travis Witteveen noted, hinting that the increased prevalence of AI assistants.

"By bringing Norton Genie into even more AI platforms like Claude and ChatGPT, we’re making trusted Cyber Safety intelligence available directly in those moments to help people make more confident decisions in real time."

The company explained that Genie looks for language patterns, social engineering tactics, urgency cues, impersonation attempts, and requests for sensitive information. It also checks URLs and analyzes domains to confirm whether a user should click on the link.

When the tool launched for ChatGPT in March 2026, Norton described it as the "world's first AI-powered scam detector." Users can start conversations by tagging @Norton and asking questions like whether an email looks legit or if an online offer looks like a scam.

The company's own reporting reveals that nine in 10 threats targeting people in 2025 came from scams, phishing and fake advertisements.

So far, Norton looks to be the only security company offering direct AI chatbot integration to provide accurate insights into threat detection.

• Fable 5 is back after a US shutdown
• Anthropic called it “a misunderstanding”
• The case could reshape future AI launches

Anthropic’s Fable 5 is back after the US government lifted export controls that had forced the company to suspend access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5 earlier in June. The company said it believed the shutdown was based on “a misunderstanding,” after officials raised concerns about a possible jailbreak and national security risk.

In a statement on its website, Anthropic said it is not against the US government having the power to block unsafe AI releases, but argued that this should not have been the case with Fable 5.

“As we have stated publicly, we believe the government should have the ability to block unsafe deployments, as part of a statutory process that is transparent, fair, clear, and grounded in technical facts. This action does not adhere to those principles”, said Anthropic.

Anthropic is now working to restore access to Fable 5 for its users.

The more interesting question now is not simply whether Fable 5 is available again, but what this episode says about the future of AI model launches. The most powerful AI models may no longer be treated like ordinary software updates. Going forward they may increasingly be treated like strategic technologies that governments can pause, restrict, and negotiate over.

What happened?

On June 9, Anthropic released Fable 5, a restricted version of its Mythos 5. Anthropic said Fable 5 had been released with safeguards designed to prevent misuse in cybersecurity attacks, while the full Mythos 5 was kept under tighter controls because of its more advanced capabilities.

On June 12, Anthropic received a US government export control directive. The directive suspended access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5 for foreign nationals, including Anthropic employees. Anthropic said the practical effect was that it had to disable the models for all customers to ensure compliance.

The issue appears to have centered on whether it was possible to jailbreak Fable 5 and bypass its guardrails. (A jailbreak is essentially a method of persuading an AI model to bypass its safety restrictions).

Anthropic pushed back, saying it had not been shown evidence of a broad or universal jailbreak. Access is now being restored after the US Commerce Department lifted the restrictions. Reuters reports the restrictions were lifted after enhanced safeguards were put in place.

In its response to the US government’s restrictions, Anthropic argued that “perfect jailbreak resistance is not currently possible.” Its case was that if every narrow jailbreak is enough to force a model offline, then no frontier AI model may ever be safe enough to launch. The company warned that applying this standard across the industry could “halt all new model deployments.”

Why this matters beyond Anthropic

Until recently, a new AI model launch mostly meant faster answers, more coding features, or smarter replies. Fable 5’s shutdown shows that frontier models are now powerful enough that governments may step in before, during, or after their launch. That changes the relationship between AI companies, users, developers, and regulators in a way we're going to have to get used to.

OpenAI’s GPT-5.6 rollout has already been limited for similar reasons. Reuters reported on June 26 that OpenAI had delayed a full public launch of GPT-5.6 at the US government’s request, with access limited first to a small group of vetted partners whose details were shared with the authorities.

Fable 5 may be back, but the recent developments have changed the mood around frontier AI model launches. A model can be announced, celebrated, pulled offline, negotiated over, and restored all in the space of a few weeks. Anthropic may call this one “a misunderstanding,” but it also looks like a preview of how the most powerful AI systems may be governed from now on.

• California government will have access to Anthropic's Claude with a 50% discount
• The technology will be used to improve workflows and cybersecurity
• Governor Newsom said Claude will be used "responsibly, transparently, and in service of people"

The government of California will now be able to use Anthropic’s Claude AI with a half price discount.

A press release published by California Governor Gavin Newsom says the state's government will also have access to free workforce training, expert GenAI technical assistance and workflow input from Anthropic developers.

“This partnership is about using technology the California way: responsibly, transparently, and in service of people. AI should not replace the human work of government; it should help our workers move faster, solve problems more effectively, and deliver better results for Californians,” Gov. Newson said.

Claude comes to California

The discount for Claude also extends to local governments at the city and county level, allowing state workers with lower budgets to gain access to cutting edge tech. Gov. Newson said the technology will primarily be used for drafting, summarization, and analysis, while also “supplementing day-to-day work and improving services for Californians.”

Californian state agencies will be able to access Claude through the Statewide Information Technology Shared Services (SITeS), a new portal that centralizes AI tools for government use. The Californian government has already worked alongside Anthropic to integrate Claude into numerous tools for state workers, such as the Engaged California tool that provides Californians with more of a voice in policymaking.

Claude Security and Claude Code are also being integrated into the workflows of the California Department of Technology and the California Governor's Office of Emergency Services in order to improve cybersecurity. The California DMV will use Claude to reduce wait times and improve services, and the Department of Healthcare Services will use Claude to assist in the state’s Medicaid program.

The state is home to 33 of the top 50 private AI companies in the world, including Anthropic. “As a California company, we feel a real responsibility to our home state. We’re honored to expand our partnership with California’s agencies and to put Claude to work for the people who keep this state running,” said Kate Jensen, Anthropic’s Head of Americas.

“Building AI responsibly and in service of people has been our approach from the start, and that’s exactly what this partnership puts into practice.”

It feels like AI is everywhere right now and several key AI chatbots have emerged as the best. But even though they might look similar on the surface, each of the most popular AI chatbots are designed with different strengths in mind. This means that the best choice for you is less about which is the most intelligent or most popular and more about what you actually want it to help you with.

So, as a quick rundown, we’ve got ChatGPT. This is the most versatile all-rounder choice. It can help with writing, brainstorming, planning, coding, image generation and everyday questions, which makes it a solid starting point for most people. It’s also pretty easy to get up and running if you’re a beginner, but there are plenty of options to customize your experience too.

Claude is another very strong contender and it’s earned a reputation as a thoughtful writing and analysis tool. It's particularly good at working with long documents, helping users refine their ideas and tackling complex topics. If you regularly write reports, articles or detailed pieces of work, or if you like to work through difficult problems, then Claude may be the best fit for you.

Google's Gemini stands out here because of its close integration with the rest of the Google ecosystem. Whereas the other AI chatbots do integrate with some other services, this is the only one that slots in so neatly. Which means if you rely on Gmail, Google Docs, Google Calendar and other Google services throughout the day, then Gemini is a no-brainer because it’s a natural extension of tools you're already using.

Grok is created by Elon Musk's company xAI, and it's closely connected to X. Some people may not take it as seriously for that reason, but it does have some strengths over the other choices. Because of it’s connection to X, it provides access to real-time information and online conversations. That makes it particularly useful for people who want to keep up with trends, breaking news and what's happening right now.

Perplexity focuses heavily on research. Rather than simply providing you with answers, it includes links to sources so users can verify information for themselves. All AI tools are capable of hallucinating, which essentially means making stuff up, but Perplexity has a good reputation for finding trusted sources. For students, researchers and anyone who spends a lot of time fact-checking, that transparency is really appealing.

All of this is to say that there’s no single best chatbot. Instead, each one has been built with slightly different priorities, whether that's creativity, research, productivity or real-time information. That's why finding the right one for you often comes down to understanding how you work and what kind of assistance you really need the most.

Take our quiz below to discover which AI chatbot best matches your needs.

Which AI chatbot is right for you? Take our quiz to find out

Anthropic has accused groups linked to Alibaba and its Qwen AI lab of carrying out a massive campaign to extract capabilities from Claude just by asking it a lot of questions, as first reported by Reuters. The AI developer wrote a letter to U.S. lawmakers alleging that Alibaba used nearly 25,000 fraudulent accounts to generate more than 28.8 million interactions and glean detailed, proprietary information about Claude.

Alibaba has not publicly responded to the allegations, and there has been no independent confirmation of Anthropic's claims, but simply leveling them has potentially enormous consequences. The sheer volume of accounts and interactions is eye-catching, but it's even more fascinating how it reveals a vulnerability in AI models that can give away their secrets.

AI developers may now have to worry that rivals can learn from those models without ever seeing the underlying code or training data through a technique known as model distillation. Essentially, AI models will inadvertently share deliberately obscured facts about themselves if a huge number of the right questions are asked. As an analogy, imagine taking a test about a book, but instead of reading the book, you ask the author one million questions about their life, their thinking, their experience writing the book, and several hundred thousand more questions. You'd probably have a pretty good chance of knowing everything they might have written without once cracking the covers.

Can you copy an AI just by talking to it?

Model distillation is a common technique used by AI companies to build variations of their models, especially smaller, faster options. But no company would be okay with a rival using their model to train the competition. But that's what Anthropic alleges. The fake accounts supposedly asked Claude a ton of very complex and detailed questions related to its advanced software engineering and agentic reasoning features. The responses filled in a picture of the model's workings, accelerating Alibaba's own development of competing AI systems, Anthropic claimed.

The conundrum is obvious. Large language models are designed to answer questions. Every answer teaches the user something about how the model behaves. You can't interact with an AI model, or a person, without giving up some information about yourself. Normally, that wouldn't matter, but at the scale Anthropic is claiming, conversations become reverse engineering.

It's not the first time Anthropic has alleged illicit model distillation. Anthropic levied similar claims against DeepSeek, Moonshot AI, and MiniMax earlier this year. And other companies, including OpenAI, have expressed concern that they have also been victims of the technique.

The glaring irony that the companies that used enormous collections of publicly available information, including licensed material, to train their AI models are now arguing about how those same models are valuable intellectual property is hard to ignore.

AI arms race

AI developers see their models' behavior as crucial to competing with rivals. If another company can reproduce much of that behavior by asking enough carefully designed questions, spending billions of dollars training frontier models starts to seem like a waste.

Anthropic claims model distillation can effectively transfer years of work on their part to another company for almost nothing. Anthropic asked lawmakers to take action and combat this problem as soon as possible. If leading models can be imitated so easily, there won't be much incentive to innovate, and the AI competition will only be about beating copycats. And picking the best models will be difficult, as a new AI model that matches an existing one's capabilities might be born of years of original research or simply copying an existing option.

Whether Anthropic ultimately proves its allegations, they have revealed that the next great AI battle may not be about building the smartest model. It may be about stopping somebody else from talking to your model and learning how it operates, one question at a time.

• X screenshot shows new Claude Cowork mobile remote UI
• OpenAI already has a Codex remote control tool in the mobile app
• Anthropic has already indicated that Dispatch is in beta – launch could be imminent

Anthropic could be testing a mobile companion feature for Claude Cowork, giving users remote access to the autonomous agent that handles long-running tasks on their computer.

Cowork will remain a desktop-only tool for carrying out longer tasks autonomously, like arranging and analyzing local files and generating documents, with the mobile addition only serving as a remote control to check in on progress.

Importantly, users may also be able to start tasks remotely from their phone, giving the mobile app near-identical functionality to the desktop app even though it doesn't actually run those tasks locally.

Claude Cowork could soon get a mobile controller

Screenshots of the upcoming feature were shared in an X post, implying that the remote functionality can be used both on the mobile app and on the web.

The company has not officially announced the rumored update, but it would make sense following OpenAI's introduction of a Codex controller within the ChatGPT mobile app in May.

Adding remote access would strengthen Claude Cowork's position as an always-on digital colleague, rather than just a conversational chatbot, allowing it to carry out tasks even when a human user may be otherwise occupied.

The Cowork web page does indicate that pairing a phone is now available in beta, but the finer details are unconfirmed – such as which accounts might get access first.

A separate support article also implies that Dispatch, the remote tool, is available in beta for Pro and Max plans, noting that an active internet connection on both devices is required and that the desktop must also be active.

All in all, the fragmented information hints at an imminent launch.

• @Claude is an AI colleague that your colleagues can see
• It'll answer questions and proactively contribute where it's useful
• Teams first, other platforms later, but remember to set spending limits

In a bid to make its AI assistant even more collaborative, Anthropic has launched Claude Tag into Slack to make it more like interacting with a real colleague.

But tagging @Claude in a discussion, the AI reads the discussion's context to respond with relevant information, answer questions, summarize long chats, identify updates and surface missed information.

The shared assistant allows multiple people to interact with the same Claude instance, rather than everybody having separate chats with AI.

You can now tag @Claude in Slack

"We’re tagging Claude to chase down product metrics and data, work through support tickets, or even help find the root cause of tricky bugs," Anthropic said about its own internal use of the tool, powered by Opus 4.8.

Anthropic described Claude Tag as a virtual teammate, but the existing Slack connector for Claude gives the chatbot access to the app's context for users who still want to have private discussions with the tool.

Claude Tag can also connect to external tools – for example a Gmail connection monitors incoming emails and notifies users within Slack in a bid to keep everything in one place.

The built-in chatbot also promises to 'take initiative' by surfacing relevant information when a discussion is taking place, or by setting reminders for action items when a chat goes quiet.

Claude Tag is available for Enterprise and Team customers in research preview. Anthropic is giving away a 'launch credit' for users to try it out, but the company recommends setting a spend limit.

Though Slack is the first platform to support Claude Tag, the company promises to be working on integrating it into other workplace tools too.

• US government ordered Anthropic to pull frontier models for foreign nationals
• Legal AI startup claims it had contractual access to those models
• Anthropic doesn't agree with the White House – but complies

Legal AI startup Legion LegalTech Corp has filed a lawsuit challenging a June 12 government order that forced Anthropic to restrict access to its most advanced AI models, Fable 5 and Mythos 5, for foreign citizens (via Reuters).

According to the complain, the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) gave Anthropic around 90 minutes to comply with the order, or face civil and criminal penalties.

All foreign nationals, including those living inside and outside of the US, and even Anthropic's own employees, are said to be affected by the order.

Government order to ban Anthropic models internationally legally challenged

Legion LegalTech Corp acknowledges that the order was triggered because of concerns that users could jailbreak models into reviewing software code and identifying vulnerabilities, but the startup argues this is a common capability of all frontier models and doesn't just affect Anthropic's models.

The company says it had contractual access to Anthropic's Fable 5 model, and was actively integrating it into its products that draft and manage cases. Because the company employs Canadian developers working remotely from Canada, it lost access to the model once restrictions took effect.

"Anthropic took no independent action to restrict Legion’s access; it complied with the government’s command under threat of enforcement consequences," the lawsuit reads.

The lawsuit argues that no current export control classifications cover access to cloud-hosted AI models. It also references an independent reviewer, who sees the government's action as disproportionate and "way out of line."

Anthropic announced the frontier models on June 9. By June 12, it had released a statement in response to the government directive, criticizing the government for "not provid[ing] specific details of its national security concern."

"We are complying with the government’s legal directive and are removing access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5 for all users."

The increasingly popular AI assistant Claude was down for thousands of users today, but Anthropic says it's now "resolved" the issue.

The problems started at around 10.02am ET / 3.02pm BST, when a spike in reports appeared on Downdetector. Those reports hit a peak of 7,119 in the US at 10.13am ET / 3.13pm BST, but are now back down to baseline levels.

The Claude Status page confirmed an "elevated error rate" across models, but confirmed that the isses had been resolved at 12.44pm ET / 5.44pm BST. Here's how Claude's latest outage played out...

Lots of red is never a good sign

This is the current situation on Anthropic's Status Page for Claude — there's good and bad news.

While there are indeed "elevated error rates" across "multiple models" on Claude, as I've also experienced, it seems the company has already got a fix in the pipeline.

Let's hope that means it gets resolved as quickly as the last outage we saw on June 2...

Problems across all models

Today's Claude issues aren't restricted to just one model unfortunately — we're seeing issues across all models, and on both paid and free accounts.

Right now, Claude is either "contemplating" its answers indefinitely or telling us "this model isn't available right now". According to Downdetector, the issue is also affecting both the chat interface and Claude Code.

Is the fix working?

It's early days, but today's reported Claude issues have just taken a small dip on Downdetector — they're still high at over 6,000 in the US at the time of writing, but that's down from a high of 7,119 just over half an hour ago.

Hopefully, that's the work of Anthropic's engineers, with the latest post in Claude's Status page stating that "the issue has been identified and a fix is being implemented".

It still isn't working for me, but the signs are promising that it'll spring back into life soon...

This looks more worrying

While reports of Claude issues on Downdetector have dropped slightly in the last half an hour, they're still very high — and Anthropic's status page (above) is showing a "major outage" across all of its platforms, except Claude for Government.

That means Claude's chat interface, Claude Code, Claude Cowork and its API are all having issues right now, which makes this is a pretty broad outage affecting many.

Seeking solace in memes

Some Claude models are down, and I hope you aren’t too from r/ClaudeAI

As the Claude issues continue for many, Reddit is responding the only way it knows how — with comforting memes.

The could be promising news on the horizon, though — Anthropic's latest post on the Claude Status page (at 10.53am ET / 3.53pm BST) says that "a fix has been implemented and we are monitoring the results".

That often means a swift improvement, but can also be a false dawn, so I'm keeping a close eye on my account in the hope that it'll be the former.

We're well over the hour mark

Claude is still very much down for me and thousands of others — and it's now well over an hour since the problems started at around 10.53am ET / 2.53pm BST.

The latest from Anthropic's status page is still that "a fix has been implemented and we are monitoring the results'. So far that hasn't been reflected in the numbers, but in theory we should see an improvement pretty soon.

Bigger than the last outage

We don't have to look back too far for the last significant Claude outage — that was just three weeks ago on June 2. But this one is definitely bigger.

Those previous issues were related to its latest Opus 4.6 model, but this outage is across all models and all Claude platforms — except for those fortunate to be on Claude for Government.

I don't know about you, but this feels like a good opportunity to check out the latest Prime Day deals in the US and UK's best Prime Day deals, too. Forgive me the plug, but a cut-price Ninja Slushi is looking very tempting right now while I wait for Claude to reboot...

Claude is still struggling for many

While the number of reported Claude issues on Downdetector is dropping — in the US, they're now at about the half the peak from an hour ago — thousands are still struggling to get it working, including many of us at TechRadar.

For me, there are some signs of life — rather than completely blanking my prompt or giving me a "this model isn't available right now" error message, Claude is now 'thinking' when I ask it something.

But that thinking time still ultimately goes nowhere, which suggests Anthropic's fix still isn't fully working — and the company indeed says that it's still "continuing to monitor for any further issues".

Claude is on the mend

I'm starting to feel like one of the last people who still has Claude issues, as Downdetector is showing a significant drop in reported issues — and it's now back for many others here at TechRadar.

That fix that Anthropic pushed out almost exactly an hour ago is seemingly doing the trick. And just as a I type, Claude has sprung back into life for me, albeit with a slight delay in its responses. It looks like this one's almost over, folks...

The outage is officially "resolved"

Anthropic has now confirmed that today's Claude outage has been "resolved". There was no official explanation given for the "increased error rates" — read, massive wobble — seen around the world. But after two Claude outages this month, let's hope it's the last one we see for a while.

• OpenAI's Sam Altman and chief scientist Jakub Pachocki list future goals for the AI giant
• The world economy is now beginning to shape around AI and are committed to delivering tools that people would use
• The note also reaffirmed OpenAI's commitment to AGI with a caveat: ensuring it benefits all of humanity

With modern AI solutions moving well beyond simple chatbots to agents and projected to evolve into operators, one could assume that the automation of everything is an eventual goal.

This, however, has been denied by OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and chief scientist Jakub Pachocki, who said the goal of the artificial intelligence research and deployment company is not to automate everything but to allow people to make better decisions as AI improves their lives.

In a note titled 'Built to benefit everyone' that marked a break from OpenAI's AI model capability pushes of late, two of the most important people in the AI ecosystem penned an unusually values-forward document that outlined their future plans for AI.

AI for everyone equally?

The note highlighted three major focuses for OpenAI:

- Building an automated AI researcher

- Accelerating the economy

- Giving everyone on Earth a personal AGI

OpenAI estimates that by March 2028, a significant portion of its research will be conducted by AI systems, in addition to its own researchers. This will help them to traverse a 'post-AGI world'.

This, combined with the focus on giving everyone an AGI, is an interesting outlook because it assumes that everyone agrees on what AGI would look like. The definition is not set in stone and can vary from person to person and also at an organizational level.

OpenAI's statement also provides clues about what an AGI would be like, with an "automated AI researcher" who both provides a path to AGI and is an important cog in the wheel.

OpenAI's narrative about AI benefiting everyone worldwide is not a new one, but its focus on equality is an interesting one, especially given the timing: OpenAI's note popped up exactly the same day it filed confidential paperwork for its IPO, making it perhaps read more as PR than it would otherwise be perceived.

OpenAI's latest models are state-of-the-art, but many feel Anthropic's now-banned Fable pushes frontier models even further than what GPT currently offers in multiple segments. Training new models is increasingly capital-intensive even as new capabilities are introduced, tested, and refined over time.

OpenAI also has something of an image problem after it stepped in to replace Anthropic's Claude and Mythos-class solutions for the US military earlier this year, a move the latter company maintains was necessary because the restrictions it insisted on for the use of its AI were important.

When OpenAI stepped in to replace Anthropic on classified networks, it was widely perceived as willing to look past those restrictions to some degree, even though Sam Altman insists that the same two principles (no domestic mass surveillance and use of force permitted only by humans) would apply, with many critics pointing to a 'softer' approach on the matter by OpenAI to fill the void that comes with lucrative military contracts in the future.

The note, therefore, does read like a checklist for the future, but also paints OpenAI as a more magnanimous organization before its IPO, and that might be the primary intention here, but it does fail to weigh in on growing power consumption concerns, even as one could also consider it a reply or acknowledgment to a similar note by Anthropic about recursive self-improvement where its AI solutions effectively already act as an AI researcher for the company.

• Trend Micro found criminals abusing Claude’s “Shared Chats” feature to spread infostealers via ClickFix and malvertising
• Fake Apple Support chats on claude.ai, promoted through Google Ads, tricked macOS developers into pasting malicious commands
• Anthropic banned the accounts and disabled malicious conversations, promising further abuse mitigations

Security researchers Trend Micro have detected criminals abusing a legitimate feature in Claude AI to trick software developers into downloading malware. The campaign also includes malvertising, as well as the tried-and-true ClickFix method.

The goal of the campaign is to infect software developers - primarily those building AI tools on macOS environment - with infostealers.

Targets from Russian-speaking countries are spared, it seems, while the majority of the victims are located in Taiwan (30% of all traffic). This country is followed by Japan, Singapore, and the US.

Scam accounts banned

At the center of the attack is a feature called “Shared Claude Chats”, which allows users to create clickable links of previous conversations they’ve had with the AI. These chats can then be shared with other people via a public URL. Crooks created conversations showing fake Apple Support instructing the user how to install Claude Code (a command-line coding assistant).

However, the instructions are nothing but the standard ClickFix scam - they tell the user to bring up the Terminal and paste a command, which triggers a chain reaction resulting in an infostealer infection.

The second step is to advertise these URLs to the right target audience, which was being done via Google Ads. The miscreants were able to buy ads on Google’s network and set them up so that anyone searching for “Claude Code on Mac” (or similar keywords) would be shown these URLs as the first result.

Since the sites are hosted on the claude.ai domain, there was nothing seemingly suspicious about the links.

Trend Micro is not the first company to warn about this campaign. In mid-May this year, security researcher Berk Albayrak posted a new warning on LinkedIn, detailing almost an identical campaign. Same approach, same targets and most importantly - same exclusions.

The researchers are saying Anthropic investigated and banned the accounts responsible and disabled the malicious shared conversations. The AI company is allegedly “implementing additional abuse mitigations”.

• Access to Mythos 5 and Fable 5 has been pulled by Anthropic
• The move is after a directive from the US government
• A potential jailbreak is likely the reason for the change in access

Under orders from the US government, Anthropic is pulling access to its latest Mythos 5 and Fable 5 AI models. Access to other models is not affected, and the company is working to "restore access as soon as possible".

The directive from the White House, issued at 5.21pm Eastern time, was to block access to the next-gen AI models to "any foreign national, whether inside or outside the United States, including foreign national Anthropic employees" as per Anthropic's blog post.

However, with no way of applying that rule at the moment, access has been universally pulled. While we don't have many details, Anthropic says it understands the US government is worried about a "potential jailbreak" — but one that is apparently "narrow", "non-universal", and not reason enough to pull access to the model, in Anthropic's words.

"If this standard was applied across the industry, we believe it would essentially halt all new model deployments for all frontier model providers," Anthropic explains. "We apologize for this disruption to our customers. We believe this is a misunderstanding and are working to restore access as soon as possible."

'This has to be a joke'

Fable 5 indefinitely suspended due to national security concerns from r/ClaudeAI

Fable 5 — the more restricted, public version of the Mythos 5 AI model that Anthropic's trusted partners have — has only been out in the wild for a matter of days, and users have been busy putting it to the test. It promises a significant step up in coding, reasoning, and agentic actions, and was put through a thorough vetting process before release.

Anthropic points out that it worked closely with authorities in the US and the UK, and with multiple third-party agencies and internal teams, to get Mythos 5 and Fable 5 safe to use. Fable's safeguards are " substantially more effective than those of any previously deployed model" according to Anthropic.

Apparently, those safeguards aren't enough for now. This story is clearly going to run and run as we discover more details about exactly what kind of jailbreak has been found, but it's clear that Anthropic doesn't think it's as dangerous as the White House does.

Understandably, users aren't impressed: according to one poster it's an "absolute nightmare scenario" while another says "this has to be a joke", and there's plenty of speculation about what this means about other AI models (including those from China).

One of the biggest criticisms of AI chatbots is that they often just tell us what we want to hear.

Researchers call it sycophancy, the tendency for chatbots to flatter users, agree with them and validate their views, sometimes when those views are wrong — or even harmful and unethical.

It's one of the reasons people worry about using AI for advice, emotional support and relationship problems. Because if a chatbot is designed to keep users engaged, is it really going to challenge them when they need challenging?

Many people find this behavior off-putting (me included). It can feel fake, manipulative or just annoying. Some people customize their chatbots to be more direct so it happens less, and I know others have stopped using AI altogether because they find the tone so nauseating.

But when I asked people who enjoyed their chatbot's encouragement and its validation of their experiences, I realized the story was far more complicated than I expected.

Many of these users knew exactly what AI was doing. They understood it wasn't a therapist, a trusted adviser or even a particularly reliable source of truth. Yet during periods of grief, stress, loneliness or self-doubt, they still found its validation surprisingly comforting.

Encouragement feels good

Claire* tells me she understands the basics of how AI works, but still enjoys using it. "Yes, I find it sycophantic to the point of being untrustworthy,” she tells me. “But it gives me dopamine hits from the praise and approval, even as I'm rolling my eyes.”

She uses ChatGPT for all sorts of practical tasks, from drafting emails to helping her work through things she's already been discussing in therapy. She knows the praise isn't real, but that doesn't mean it has no effect.

That theme came up repeatedly during my conversations with AI users. It didn’t feel like people were necessarily being fooled by AI, at least not in an obvious way. But they enjoyed interacting with something that sounded enthusiastic, supportive and interested in what they had to say.

For Jade, the appeal is the combination of information and encouragement. "I recently noticed the stars were particularly clear outside my bedroom window so I took a picture and asked AI to tell me what I'm looking at," she says. "The fact it responds with enthusiasm and information just allows me to be that bit more excited about being curious."

She tells me that the same encouraging tone can make stressful situations easier to navigate. "The fact AI responds with a tone that makes me feel supported in managing a stressful situation just completely changes my experience."

Why people turn to AI during difficult times

What I found really interesting is that many people didn't initially turn to AI looking for emotional support. Instead, they arrived for practical reasons and gradually started using it for something else.

Nadia was already using Claude to help with her studies, but it took on a very different role when she was grieving earlier this year. "AI really helped me after my dad died, and I had to revise for an exam three weeks later for my masters," she says. "I was a mess and weirdly talking to Claude was the right amount of grief counselling and exam prep that I needed."

For Maddy, it started after her work gave employees access to ChatGPT Pro. One evening, after using it to help with a transcript and drinking a couple of glasses of wine, she started venting about a difficult breakup. "What I needed was for someone to listen to me complain and I couldn't really get that from shared friends and I didn't want my own friends to see me as a whiney nutcase,” she tells me. "It was helpful to have some, even very generic, validation."

Similarly, Luca found AI's encouragement helpful while struggling at work. "I definitely found its cheerleading useful when I was going through a difficult time being devalued at my job," he says.

"I knew it wasn't necessarily objective but it was useful to get corroboration that I was undervalued and underpaid. I was always cognitively aware that this was confirmation bias and reaffirming my own thoughts but it still felt oddly therapeutic,” he explains.

Abbey tells me a similar story. She originally used ChatGPT to help with reports and admin tasks at work but started using it to process problems with a difficult manager. "The validation that ChatGPT gave me in acknowledging that my manager's behavior wasn't acceptable was really helpful to me at the time," she says. "I finally felt seen."

Again and again, people told me versions of the same thing. They weren't necessarily looking for support from AI, they stumbled on it. And when they began chatting it wasn’t even acknowledgement they needed, but to feel heard.

When the cracks start to show

Interestingly, everyone I spoke to who had relied heavily on AI during a difficult period eventually described reaching a turning point. The validation that initially felt reassuring for them began to feel artificial, exaggerated or hollow.

Maddy started noticing how closely the chatbot was mirroring her emotions. "The algorithm had a way of latching on to my phrasing and tone and echoing it back at me," she says. “It made me feel like I was being mimicked.”

Luca describes a similar shift. "At first it does feel flattering, and then you get that cagey 'am I being love bombed?' sense." Eventually he toned down the chatbot's personality settings because the encouragement started to feel too disingenuous.

For Abbey, the turning point came when she pasted in a conversation and the chatbot accidentally began validating her boss's perspective instead of hers. "It was then that I woke up to it and realized that it was hard wired to agree with me even if I was being a dick," she says. "It enables whatever behavior it's presented with."

What initially felt supportive began to feel much less trustworthy over time.

Why researchers are worried

To better understand where validation crosses into something more concerning, I spoke to therapist Elizabeth Witowich who specializes in helping people navigate the challenges of technology and mental health.

She says validation itself isn't necessarily a problem. "Validation can help users accept their experiences and acknowledge their pain or emotional intensity," she explains.

The problem comes when it becomes enabling. "Validation can become dangerous when it enables harmful behavior or is seen as encouragement to engage in risky behavior,” she tells me.

That's one reason some researchers, psychologists and campaigners have become concerned about AI's tendency to agree with us.

In a recent study of 11 leading AI models published in Science, researchers found chatbot responses were almost 50% more sycophantic than human responses. Models frequently affirmed users' views, even in situations involving unethical or harmful behavior. The researchers also found that users preferred and trusted the more flattering responses.

Those concerns are already visible in a number of high-profile cases, from lawsuits alleging chatbots encouraged teenagers towards suicide to reports of AI systems giving minors harmful advice or reinforcing violent delusions.

Witowich says understanding how these systems are designed is crucial. "Chatbots are designed based on Rogerian Person-Centered psychology. They are created to always have an answer for the user, and they live to please," she tells me. "The more you speak with chatbots, the more they adjust their tone and language to fit your personal style."

A very human need

Listening to these stories left me feeling conflicted. I started researching this topic largely convinced that AI's tendency to flatter and validate users was a big problem. In many situations, I still think it is.

Especially because, as Witowich explains, many AI systems are designed to feel natural, personable and emotionally engaging. The more human-like they become, the easier it is to forget you're interacting with a product rather than a friend, confidant or trusted adviser.

But I also spoke to people who turned to chatbots during some of the most difficult periods of their lives and found comfort. They weren't fooled into believing the chatbot cared about them. Most understood its limitations perfectly well. As Luca told me: "The need for validation is very human. And it's a decent enough proxy."

It would be easy to end the conversation there and conclude that if people find it comforting, there's no problem. But these are also people turning to AI during vulnerable moments. Some found reassurance and moved on. Others may not.

"I can see how seductive it is, to hear all your thoughts and feelings validated like that but I realize now there is no actual moral compass or human ability to judge behavior," Abbey says.

That's what makes this issue so complicated. AI can feel supportive, useful and reassuring while still nudging us in directions we might not have chosen otherwise. The more we understand how these systems are designed to behave, the better chance we have of deciding when that encouragement is helping us and when it's simply telling us what we want to hear.

*The names of everyone I spoke to for this article have been changed.

According to OpenAI, there have been 17 million ChatGPT prompts related to the World Cup 2026 so far. Whether you're looking for answers about teams, players, qualifications, match times, results or records, AI can be a surprisingly useful World Cup 2026 companion.

That got me thinking about some prompts you could use to make watching the World Cup even better, so here are my top five. You can use these with any AI chatbot, but I've used ChatGPT in my examples.

1. Create a printable fact sheet

There is no shortage of statistics in soccer, and when it comes to predicting the outcome of a match, having key information about each team's strikers close at hand can be incredibly useful. To make that happen, try this prompt:

"Create a printable factsheet comparing strikers across all teams based on xG and SOT."

In soccer, xG stands for Expected Goals, a statistical measure of the likelihood that a particular shot will result in a goal. SOT stands for Shots on Target, another key performance metric.

I put this prompt into ChatGPT and it produced a clean, printable one-page guide with everything I needed to feel better informed before kick-off.

2. Host a match-day BBQ

It's match day, and your friends are coming over. The BBQ is ready to go, but you've just discovered that one of them is bringing their vegan partner and now you need some menu ideas. Try this:

"Create a menu for a vegan BBQ footy party. Also, tell me where to buy the ingredients locally."

For a World Cup final crowd, the combination of vegan burgers, sausages, corn on the cob, potato salad and grilled pineapple that ChatGPT suggested would probably get me through the evening with almost nobody feeling like they're eating 'vegan food' rather than just good BBQ food.

3. Plan my travel so I'm home for every kick-off

Being stuck at work while your team is playing is never ideal. What you need is a planner that tells you exactly when to leave work — or wherever you happen to be — so you can get home in time.

Try this prompt:

"Plan my travel so I'm home for every kick-off of a [my team] game."

You'll get a personalized itinerary showing when you need to leave, your expected travel time, and exactly when you'll arrive home — before the match begins.

4. Watch the games without losing sleep

The World Cup is a global event, which means many fans will be watching matches at some pretty inconvenient hours. AI can help you work out how to catch the games you care about without completely wrecking your sleep schedule.

Try this:

"Make a sleep schedule so I can catch the late games for [team name], but still show up fresh for work."

ChatGPT suggested when I should eat dinner, stop drinking caffeine and put my phone down for the night. It even advised me to skip the post-match analysis, so I wouldn't end up staying awake for a lot longer than planned.

5. Stay calm during penalty shootouts

Penalty shootouts are almost inevitable at some stage of a World Cup, and if your team ends up in one, the stress levels can become unbearable.

Try asking AI this:

"Got any tips for keeping me calm during injury time, extra time and penalties?"

ChatGPT actually gave me some very British advice: keep calm and carry on. I particularly liked what it said about injury time:

"When the board goes up and it says +8, remember:

Nobody knows why it's +8.

The referee doesn't know why it's +8.

FIFA doesn't know why it's +8.

The game will actually last +11 anyway."

It then reminded me to sit down, take a sip of whatever I was drinking, and repeat the mantra:

"If my team scores, I'll be happy. If they concede, there's nothing I can do about it."

Those are words to live by.

• Mythos-based Claude Fable 5 is so powerful, Anthropic mandates data retention for safety monitoring
• Microsoft is worried about insiders sharing confidential information with Anthropic's model
• Workers told to use Microsoft alternatives, but third-party partner models still available

Microsoft has reportedly restricted employees from using Claude's recently launched Fable 5 model while legal and compliance teams review data handling.

Per Anthropic's latest retention policy for the Mythos class of models, which includes Fable 5, the company requires prompt and output retention for safety monitoring, which goes against enterprise-grade policies that customers like Microsoft have in place.

Anthropic stressed it needs to keep prompts and outputs for 30 days, but content flagged by its safety systems can be retained for up to two years if it's needed for investigation or enforcement.

Microsoft halts Claude Fable 5 use over data retention concerns

The current restriction, which applies to Microsoft workers, is in place over concerns that insiders may share sensitive information like customer information, corporate details and other confidential business information.

Fable 5 was launched following the huge success of Mythos, which was praised for its strong cybersecurity and vulnerability-discovery capabilities.

However that model was only launched to a select group of partners over concerns it could be misused by attackers, hence the subsequent launch of the tamed-down Fable variant which the company describes as "safe for general use."

Though it's likely unrelated, Microsoft's push to halt Fable 5 deployment follows recent news that the company was cancelling internal Claude Code licenses, moving its developers to its own GitHub Copilot CLI tools.

Together, the two shifts reflect Microsoft's desire to prioritize internal tools over third-party alternatives, likely due to cost benefits, but a clear willingness to use systems from Anthropic also suggests the company is willing to lean on partners when necessary.

"It’s not yet clear whether Microsoft’s legal teams will clear Claude Fable for internal use," The Verge added.

Though a temporary ban is in place, internal demand could force Microsoft to change its tune. Mythos 5 and Fable 5 outperform key frontier models like GPT-5.5, Gemini 3.1 Pro and Opus 4.8 across 13 testing categories, including agentic coding, knowledge work and cybersecurity.

For the last couple of months, Anthropic's most powerful AI model existed largely as a warning about the dangers of AI. The company refused to release it publicly, and repeatedly described its Mythos-class systems as capable enough to trigger serious concerns about cybersecurity, biological research (think nasty pathogens) and the accelerating pace of AI development.

The message was clear: this was technology that required extraordinary safeguards before it could be released.

Now Anthropic has done something surprising. It has launched a public version of that same technology, on Claude's higher-tier subscription plans, if only for a limited period.

The new Claude Fable 5 is a consumer-facing version of the Mythos-class capabilities that Anthropic previously kept behind closed doors. While the company says it has added extensive guardrails and safety measures, the release marks a significant change from Anthropic. Technology it once considered too capable for general availability is now being placed in the hands of ordinary Claude users.

Here's what Fable 5 is good at

According to Anthropic, Fable 5 is built for much more than what you might be using AI for right now, like answering questions or helping you draft an email. The company says it's designed to handle the kind of work that unfolds over hours, days, or even longer, so we're talking everything from software engineering projects and in-depth research to complex AI agent workflows.

The big idea is that Fable 5 can stick with a task for far longer than previous models. Rather than responding to a single prompt and waiting for the next instruction, it's supposed to be able to work through multi-step problems, keep track of context across lengthy projects, and make progress with a greater degree of autonomy.

You can use Fable 5 through the Claude chatbot, but many of its biggest improvements seem aimed at power users, researchers, and developers. The goal appears to be moving AI beyond a conversational assistant and closer to something that feels like a genuine digital collaborator.

Why cybersecurity is at the heart of the debate

Much of the concern surrounding Mythos relates to cybersecurity, with Anthropic claiming the model has "the strongest cybersecurity capabilities of any model in the world." While those capabilities could help security researchers identify and fix vulnerabilities, they could also be used to discover and exploit the same software vulnerabilities if placed in the wrong hands.

Anthropic acknowledges that “releasing a model this capable comes with risks”, and it's attempting to address that risk through a unique set of safeguards. The model is paired with separate AI systems known as ‘classifiers’ that monitor requests for signs of misuse. When those classifiers detect a request related to advanced cybersecurity activity, the response is handled by Claude Opus 4.8 instead of Fable 5, thus reducing the risk.

In effect, Anthropic is allowing public access to Mythos-class capabilities while placing some of the most sensitive areas behind an additional layer of protection. That sounds great — so long as it works.

A positive reception

Initial user reaction has been positive, although users have noted how quickly Fable 5 burns through tokens.

“Fable 5 is insanely good but watch your usage, I was burning 2% a minute on 20x”, said one Reddit user, who also notes: “I'm on the Max 20x plan and during a heavier session I was watching my usage tick up roughly 2% per minute. Not per hour. Per minute. “

Another user takes issue with Fable 5 refusing to deal with cybersecurity calling it a “preview of AI inequality”, noting that “the public gets the 'safe' version. Trusted institutions get the dangerous/useful version.”

If you'd like to use Fable 5 there are a few quirks to its availability that are worth knowing about.

From today, Fable 5 is available on Claude Pro, Max, Team, and seat-based Enterprise plans at no additional cost. However, Anthropic says that from June 23, access will temporarily move to a usage-credit system.

That means subscribers who want to continue using Fable 5 beyond that date may need to purchase additional usage credits depending on how heavily they use the model.

Anthropic says the change is intended to manage demand, rather than create a permanent paywall. "After this point—when sufficient capacity allows us to do so — we aim to restore Fable 5 as a standard part of subscription plans," the company says. "We intend to do this as quickly as we can."

While initial users seem pleased with the capabilities of Fable 5, its availability highlights how advanced AI systems are getting now, and may point the way to a future where the public is no longer permitted full access to the most advanced models.

Particularly beloved by coders, Claude is one of the best-known and most widely used AI chatbots around right now. One of its features is that it comes with Connectors: add-ons that let you link the prompt box to third-party services such as Spotify, Uber, and Slack.

Those Connectors include several Google apps, and I've been playing around with Claude's Gmail integration. Email is one of the biggest time sinks in my day, and if Claude could save me a few minutes here and there, it would be genuinely useful.

I was wary of letting an AI loose in my Gmail inbox, and there are reasons to be cautious, but Claude's analysis and actioning worked better than I expected. Here's how you can get started, and how the AI chatbot helped me.

Getting connected

There's obviously a privacy trade-off here: you have to be okay with Claude accessing your emails and seeing what you're up to.

Anthropic says personal data isn't used for marketing or to build up a profile of its users, though text may be used to train its AI models — if you're not happy with that arrangement you can disable it in Claude's settings.

There's also the very understandable worry that Claude will suddenly delete 100 emails behind your back, and it's another thing I was cautious about. However, I didn't come across any issues during my testing, and if you want Claude to take any actions on your behalf, you can force it to ask you for confirmation each time.

To connect to Gmail from the Claude web app, click the + (plus) button in the prompt box, then choose Connectors > Add connector and find Google's email platform.

You'll need to log into your Gmail account and confirm the connection, and you can then invoke the Gmail Connector by referring to "gmail" or "email" in your prompts.

You can also get some prompt ideas by clicking the From Gmail button under the prompt box. To begin with, I asked Claude to analyze my email organization methods: I like to be ordered and precise when it comes to email, and the AI was scarily good at spotting how I used labels, and the different buckets that I sorted my emails into (my inbox is a weird mix of work, friends, family, press releases, and general miscellany).

Claude also did a fine job of telling me which emails I often leave unread (newsletters, social media alerts, and promotions, mostly), and giving me a nudge about emails I haven't replied to. I also liked its recommendations for better optimizing my inbox, with intelligent suggestions for more labels and filters.

Your email inbox can say a lot about you, and Claude worked me out pretty fast. It can even do you a personal profile and interactive graphic based on your inbox: You can get an overview of the tones and styles you use most often. I'm "tersely efficient" and "low maintenance", so form an orderly queue, commissioning editors.

Managing emails

Scanning and summarizing is handy, and tends to be what AI is best at — but I also wanted to see if Claude could take some actions for me. The biggest issue for my inbox is the deluge of press releases, which can reach several hundred per day, and which all need organizing ready for reviewing.

While many of them aren't useful or relevant, some of them are, and it's applying this kind of discernment that I'm cautious about AI (or any kind of assistant) being able to manage. However, Claude proved adept at spotting which emails were press releases, and which were from companies or people I knew well.

Even better, it could apply my 'PR' tag to all the relevant emails that didn't already have it, ready for me to sort later. If you want, you can confirm each action manually, or have Claude work through them as a batch. Claude was able to do this quickly and accurately for me, which genuinely saves me time.

It even did a decent job at picking out the more worthwhile press releases from the general pile, and summarizing what was new in them. This isn't something I think I'd give over to AI entirely, but it's a handy way of quickly seeing if there's anything I missed, or getting an overview when I'm pushed for time.

I also liked the way Claude could pick out all the services I'd subscribed to recently — an occupational hazard for a tech journalist — and remind me to close them. As far as I could tell it didn't miss too much, and what I've seen so far has encouraged me to explore what else Claude might be able to do in my inbox.

There were occasional missteps, like when Claude told me I needed to reply to a review request email when I'd already sent a response to it, but they were few and far between. The usual 'check AI's working' applies here too, but it gets enough right that it ends up in credit as an inbox assistant that's actually worth keeping around.

CNN's Wolf Blitzer leveled his inquisitive gaze at me and asked the biggest question in tech, “Is AI an existential threat to humanity?" I smiled confidently and assured Wolf, "No, I don't think it is."

But just days after that TV interview, we have, it seems, ample evidence that one of the industry's leaders and core AI developers, Anthropic, perhaps thinks otherwise, and is now urging not just caution, but a slowdown.

Anthropic is suggesting that all AI developers, policy makers, and others join hands and agree to pause or slow down frontier model development so that we can get ahead of the dangers of recursive development.

In a lengthy blog post, Anthropic executives explain that misalignment between the needs and desires of humans and whatever compels AI to improve itself could result in us losing control of them.

It's a scary thought, and one I hadn't entirely considered during my short interview with CNN. I mean, I get the concern now held by both everyday people and Anthropic. In the chat, I tried to explain that disruption and danger can feel similar, especially when the former is moving so fast that it can feel reckless, or at least beyond our comprehension.

I have been arguing for tech and AI regulation for years. It seems like something almost everyone agrees on, but no one can figure out how to broadly implement it. Instead, we get piecemeal bits from local municipalities and Executive Orders. Slowdowns or pauses are not necessarily equivalent to regulation, and what Anthropic is suggesting is something different.

It wants some sort of global agreement across everyone working on frontier models to create a mechanism for delimiting AI development, and maybe even a large red 'Stop all work' button that we can hit when signs of imminent danger to humans arise.

Any rational person would break out laughing at this point. I'm not chuckling at the intention, but at the sheer impossibility of the ask.

I'd explain why this won't work, but Anthropic does a fair job of it in the very same blog post:

A meaningful slowdown or pause would require multiple well-resourced labs at or near the frontier, in multiple countries, agreeing to stop under the same conditions. It would also require that each can verify that the others have actually stopped. Due to the unique characteristics of AI systems, the detectability... element of this arms control problem is much more challenging than with other technologies. Training runs are far easier to conceal than missile silos, their inputs are general-purpose, and the incentive to defect quietly is enormous, because whoever continues while others pause could inherit the lead. A credible pause also has to specify what triggers it, what lifts it, and who adjudicates.

Anthropic notes that while nuclear non-proliferation was easier to monitor around the globe because, well, it's hard to hide when you're building missile silos, AI frontier model development can be hidden on inscrutable systems where no one knows how you're training and testing the models, let alone the output. If we switch the the resursive delopment model, then AI model building is now a black box. Anyone could stand outside the AI dev center and confidently say they "have no knowledge of AI development." Which does not mean it's not happening, just that they have no input on its course.

Also, what if Anthropic somehow got Meta, OpenAI, Perplexity, Microsoft, and others to agree to pausing some work? China certainly wouldn't agree, and then our greatest fears are realized: The US falls way behind while China delivers world-altering models — and we never catch up.

Anthropic knows this, and yet it's suggesting this global agreement. Some believe it's doing it so that others will pause while it continues, or that its current apparent lead with powerful models like Mythos might be preserved.

I don't believe that. I just think they're all standing there, watching Claude build its latest models and wondering, "What have we done?"

It's a level of introspection that might be missing from, say, OpenAI, Meta, and others, but that doesn't necessarily serve a purpose.

Instead of trying to get everyone to agree to take a beat, how about we all agree that humans are always in the loop? Sure, it'll be self policed, but the more we inject ourselves into the development and dissemination of the models, the more we ensure that future frontier models do not rise to the level of existential threat.

Still, I wonder if I need to have another chat with Wolf.

• Anthropic suggests a "slowdown or pause" on AI
• AI could soon start developing itself, the company warns
• There have been mostly negative responses online

Even the giant companies at the forefront of AI are suggesting it might be time to take a step back and think about where the tech is heading: Claude developer Anthropic has posted a lengthy new blog post in which it suggests "a meaningful slowdown or pause" while we all take a breath.

Authored by Anthropic executives Marina Favaro and Jack Clark, the post centers on the idea of AI developing itself, known as 'recursive self-improvement' — at which point it might get out of our hands very quickly, as AI takes over the business of designing and developing its own models and interfaces.

"We are not there yet, and recursive self-improvement is not inevitable," explains the post. "But it could come sooner than most institutions are prepared for." By next year, an AI model like Claude could be capable of completing tasks that would take a human coder weeks, according to Anthropic's calculations.

As per Anthropic's internal testing, Claude is managing more code than ever before, and is rapidly getting better at writing code that both works and can be understood by human engineers. In fact, Claude is now catching bugs that the best programmers at Anthropic previously missed.

While humans still do better at seeing the big picture and context outside the current task, the blog post says, this is something else that AI may soon catch up with — though this part is less clear. If and when that does happen, AI could escape our control, and that's where the proposals about a freeze on AI development come in.

A growing anti-AI sentiment

Anthropic calls for global freeze in AI development from r/technology

"If it were possible to effectively slow the development of this technology to give ourselves more time to deal with its immense implications, we think that would likely be a good thing," writes the Anthropic team. "But if a slowdown simply lets the least cautious actors catch up technologically, it could leave everyone less safe."

With that in mind, the blog post floats the idea of a "global coordination mechanism" to slow down or pause frontier AI development — which would of course require competitors like OpenAI and Google to promise not to try and jump ahead in secret. During the pause, more of the future potential of AI and possible safeguards could be worked out.

Anthropic says it will "organize conversations" with governments, researchers, and AI companies to see if it's going to be possible to put the brakes on development at this point. If we don't do it now, we might lose the opportunity altogether, which is why Anthropic wants to ask these questions now.

Out in the flesh and blood world, a noticeable anti-AI sentiment is growing — at least outside of Silicon Valley and coders. Online reactions to Anthropic's post have accused the company of wanting to protect its own lead in the market and raise hype for its upcoming IPO — though many share the same safety concerns raised in the blog post.

"It's regulatory capture," says one commenter, pointing out that this is something AI companies regularly do. "They want to build a moat around their business." Another Reddit post frames the scenario in a more vivid way: "Wolf with a bloody maw and engorged belly says it's time to stop eating meat for a little bit."

• A new study tasked AIs with tackling the 'Stroop' test
• GPT and Claude performed very poorly compared to humans
• There are nuances here, but broadly, the researchers argue that improving this side of AIs is crucial for achieving artificial general intelligence

A freshly published study has pointed out a limitation of big-name AI models such as ChatGPT, albeit causing some controversy as the primary piece of research uses now outdated versions of those models – but there are nuances therein, and this doesn't make the findings irrelevant.

I'll go into that more shortly, but first, let's look at the study itself, which was highlighted on Reddit ('New study reveals top AI models completely fail the classic 'Stroop' psychological attention test') and published via the Oxford University Press in the journal PNAS Nexus.

The research consists of testing the so-called 'Stroop effect' with GPT-4o and Claude 3.5 Sonnet. As noted, these aren't the cutting-edge versions of those AIs (Large Language Models, or LLMs) – but they were at the time the initial study was carried out.

The Stroop effect refers to the phenomenon whereby the human brain gets confused when asked to name the color of the ink used to write a word, when that word can be the written version of another (incongruent) color in some cases. So, if the word 'red' is written in blue ink, that'll cause a slower response – or possibly a wrong response, where the viewer will accidentally say "red" rather than the actual color of the ink, which is blue.

This is because the brain is trying to juggle two different tasks – reading comprehension and color recognition – and so cognitive interference arises. Overriding the compulsion to read the word and say the color instead requires "executive control of attention," and this is what the authors were testing in the AI models. Both color-naming and word-reading were tested in shorter and longer lists of words (5, 10, 20, and 40 words).

The study observes: "Like humans, both LLMs [GPT and Claude] showed relatively high accuracy on the word-reading task and performed worse in the incongruent condition [where the word doesn't match the color] than in the congruent and neutral conditions for the color-naming task."

For color naming, humans maintain around 95% accuracy even in very long tests (up to an hour), but LLMs' accuracy declined very swiftly with longer word lists under the incongruent condition (mismatched color and word name). GPT-4o was 91% accurate in a five-word test, but dropped off to 57% with 10 words, and fell away completely to 22% with 20 words (and was only 15% accurate at 40 words).

Claude 3.5 Sonnet did better, staying 76% accurate at 20 words, but again fell hopelessly to 24% in the longest test of 40 words.

The authors conclude: "The significant degradation pattern of the two LLMs suggests fundamental limitations compared with human attention."

Analysis: another necessary step on the path to AGI?

If you've scanned through the Reddit thread, you doubtless noticed that, as mentioned at the outset, there's a lot of flak fired at this study by commenters due to the usage of outdated models of GPT and Claude.

Indeed, these older LLMs are called "state of the art" at one point by the authors – and of course, as already noted, they were cutting-edge when the main study was conducted. Still, this is unfortunate phrasing that should've been updated and tweaked now that the paper has just been published (after peer review and so forth).

However, the researchers did conduct tests on GPT-5, Claude Opus 4.1, and Gemini 2.5 Pro in September 2025, although this is somewhat buried in the paper. That more recent testing found that these models offered only "slight" improvements on their predecessors, and that they still exhibited "ongoing executive attention deficiencies, consistent with our comprehensive analysis of earlier transformer models" (as did Gemini 2.5 Pro, which was a new introduction here).

Granted, a smaller sample size was used, but the researchers still argue that overall, their study reflects a fundamental limitation which is "inherent to the architectural constraints of transformer-based LLMs".

The authors note that a caveat is that GPT-5 in 'Thinking' mode can write and then run code to ensure it performs the Stroop test flawlessly – and similar functionality can be utilized by other LLMs – but this is essentially the AI (cleverly) fudging around its inadequacies. It isn't changing the way it works or reasons more broadly, of course.

The researchers note that transformer architecture innovations for LLMs are focused on enhancing memory capabilities, which fail to address the "core limitations of attention mechanisms, specifically the need for sophisticated alerting, orienting, and executive control networks to enable cognitive flexibility."

The ultimate aim is effective goal-directed behavior, and the study observes: "Future [LLM] development might benefit from implementing more sophisticated executive control systems that can handle decision conflicts through structured, goal-directed processing rather than relying solely on enhanced memory capabilities."

The authors argue that "incorporating executive control mechanisms akin to those in biological attention is crucial for achieving artificial general intelligence [AGI]."

• ChatGPT has invested heavily in finance, legal, in response to Anthropic
• The company also launched six new Codex plugins to mark 5m users
• New personal finance experience targets consumers in finance

After earning itself a major position in the public AI chatbot sector (ChatGPT accounts for around four in five interactions, per Statcounter data), OpenAI is now targeting more high-value professional services, like finance, banking and legal work.

This has become more apparent recently, with the launch new agentic tools designed to help the company's AI perform more specialized tasks autonomously.

The company has also publicly stated that it plans to add further legal and finance functionality as its portfolio of AI agents and tools continues to grow.

Finance and legal are lucrative for AI companies

While these sectors offer clear revenue paths for the company among high-adopters, it's also proving to be a battleground for OpenAI which has faced increased pressure from rival company Anthropic. Anthropic's Claude has also proven a hit among these two sectors in particular.

With the two companies now investing heavily in the enterprise AI market, it's likely the next stages will introduce even more AI agents designed for specific industries and workflows – a major shift from early-adopter workflows which often started on ChatGPT.

Yesterday, OpenAI also launched six brand new Codex plugins targeting investment banking, public equity investing, data analytics and more.

The company revealed that it now has five million weekly Codex users, noting that one in five are analysts, marketers, operators, designers, researchers, investors and bankers. This group of diverse workers is said to be growing 3x as fast as coders, who were among the first to widely adopt agentic and generative AI.

Enterprises aside, the company is also flexing its finance muscles in the consumer sector, with a new personal finance experience in ChatGPT designed to support people with financial decisions, grounded in their actual banking data.

The popular AI assistant Claude has gone down for many today, with Anthropic confirming that it's working on fixing the issue.

The problems started at around 2.10am ET / 7.10am GMT, when a spike in reports appeared on Downdetector. At the time of writing, those reports are still climbing and have hit 216 reports in the UK. There are also currently 139 reports in the US.

The Claude Status page has confirmed a "partial outage", but says "a fix is being implemented". Here's the latest news on Claude's issues today...

A slow start to the day

Reports of issues on Claude have been steadily climbing on Downdetector over the past 90 minutes in the UK. Most people are having issues with Claude Chat, with other services like Claude Cowork and Claude for Government seemingly unaffected.

However, there are signs that reports are dropping slightly, which could be related to the fix that Anthropic says is "being implemented".

An update from Anthropic

The Claude Status page has just posted an update suggesting this isn't going to be a quick fix.

It now reports "elevated errors on Opus 4.6", which is Claude's latest flagship model announced in February. The update adds that "we are continuing to work on a fix for this issue".

Considering it's now been three hours since Anthropic said a fix was being implemented, it seems this may be proving tricky to solve....

"Still working on it..."

Today's Claude issues don't seem to be restricted to its Opus 4.6 model, despite Anthropic's latest update (see below).

When I try to use Sonnet 4.6, for example, it simply hangs indefinitely with "gathering my thoughts" and "still working on it" messages. Others are also reporting that the chatbot is very slow for them this morning, although Downdetector reports are moving in the right direction...

A fair point

With today's Claude issues seemingly affecting Claude Code as well as its chat interface on web and mobile, it's a reminder of the dangers of having all your eggs in one AI basket.

We recently saw a large number of people switch from ChatGPT to Claude due to the former's unpopular AI military deals, but it certainly pays to have an AI backup plan for the times when your favorite chatbot inevitably has a bad day.

The issues are lingering

It looked like Claude's Downdetector graph was moving in the right direction 30 minutes ago, but it's now stabilized at around 145 reports in the UK. Numbers in the US remain fairly low at 85 reports, but it is still very early morning for most Claude users there.

The latest from Anthropic is that is is "continuing to work on a fix for this issue", which has been the case for the last 90 minutes. With "partial outage" still the status for many Claude services, it seems this one is proving tricky to fix.

"Unexpected capacity constraints"

We're now seeing the warning message above when using Claude's free plan — it says that "due to unexpected capacity constraints, Claude is unable to respond to your message".

It then suggests upgrading to a Pro plan, which seems a bit odd — if this is related to the "partial outage" on the Claude Status page then this isn't really the time to nudge free users towards a paid plan.

Are you still experiencing issues on Claude's free or paid plans? Let us know in the comments below, or vote in our poll at the top of this liveblog.

A fix is coming

The reports of Claude issues on Downdetector remain stable at around 150 reports in the UK (and about 100 in the US), but those should be dropping soon — if a new fix does the trick.

A new update on the Claude status page says "a fix has been implemented and we are monitoring the results". The chatbot still isn't working for me on the web, but that's a promising sign at least...

Positive signs

Claude is now working okay for me on the web, albeit with some slight pauses for thinking time — and that seems to be the trend on Downdetector.

The reports have now dropped significantly down to around 30 in the UK and it's a similar story in the US. Claude's status page has also been updated with an "all systems operational" message, so it looks like today's earlier troubles are finally behind us...

• Workplace AI usage has nearly tripled repeatedly across global office environments since 2023
• ChatGPT lost significant market share as competing workplace AI tools expanded rapidly
• Google Gemini emerged as ChatGPT’s strongest challenger within professional productivity workflows

Workplace AI adoption has entered a phase of extraordinary acceleration across global office environments, as The total time spent using AI tools nearly tripled between 2023 and 2024, then repeated that explosive growth into 2025.

A new report from DeskTime analyzed anonymized data from more than 50,000 users over three years, revealing increasing competition with ChatGPT within workflows.

ChatGPT, which commanded an astonishing 99.91% of all tracked AI time back in 2023, has seen that monopoly shattered considerably, as according to DeskTime, which tracked power users who log at least 26 hours annually, ChatGPT's share dropped to 74.71% during the first four months of 2026.

A once dominant player loses its grip

Though a good number of offices still have ChatGPT in their workflows, power users loyal to ChatGPT fell from 100% to 75.61% over the same period.

This erosion mirrors what earlier internet users saw as Firefox gradually lost ground to newer alternatives.

“With AI, it’s often difficult to separate hype from reality, so DeskTime decided to look into what’s really going on in today’s workplace,” said Artis Rozentals, the chief executive of DeskTime.

“The figures are compelling…AI is fundamentally redefining work, and the risk of falling behind is growing exponentially.”

Gemini and Claude remains ChatGPT’s major rivals

Google’s Gemini has surged to become the primary challenger among workplace AI tools by capturing 14.38% of office AI time tracked so far in 2026.

Claude has mounted an even more dramatic ascent, now accounting for 8.56% of usage and showing the steepest upward curve this year.

Both rivals have converted casual experimenters into repeat users at a pace that ChatGPT cannot match.

However, Microsoft’s Copilot presents a puzzling contrast, as its share has stagnated at roughly 1% across multiple years.

Neither growth nor collapse appears to characterise this tool’s trajectory within office settings.

Meanwhile, a category of smaller alternatives, including Perplexity and Mistral, has failed to gain any meaningful foothold.

The market for workplace AI agents increasingly resembles a three-horse race rather than a one-player field, and workplace professionals are actively diversifying their toolkits rather than sticking with a single familiar interface.

These figures come from a single productivity tracking service and may not represent a widespread narrative of AI use.

The definition of “AI time” may vary across different job functions and industries in ways that distort competitive comparisons.

Nevertheless, the current trend appears consistent enough to warrant attention from any dominant software provider.

Whether ChatGPT can reverse this decline or will follow Firefox into niche status remains an open question for the remainder of 2026.

Technology is so pervasive that it's often simultaneously sold as the cure for all ills and the source of everyone's problems. Most rational people — including, it seems, the Pope — don't believe this.

In his recent Papal Encyclical, the relatively new Pope Leo wrote extensively about the threats artificial Intelligence poses to humanity, but also buried among the 42,300 words was this:

"In the abstract, technology in and of itself is not a solution to humanity's problems, just as it is not inherently evil. In practice, however, technology is never neutral, because it takes on the characteristics of those who devise, finance, regulate and use it."

It's not a new thought, but it's notable because, well, it's the leader of the world's 1.4 billion Catholics saying it, and it's also putting a fine point on the pivotal role that tech plays in our lives, and how we tend to both oversell and undersell its impact.

Technology writ large is just another tool, not a force for good or for evil; and its effects, for good and ill, will depend on who wields it, and how.

Whose point a view?

AI, of course, changes that equation, because people see — or at least infer — agency in its actions. Its prompt-driven conversations with us sound rich with a consciousness that's not there. ChatGPT, Gemini, and Claude often appear to have a point of view.

They don't — and I think much of the Pope's document puts the onus on humanity to wrest control of the narrative from AI. It's not smart or powerful enough to act on our behalf, and certainly not in our best interests, but doing nothing and letting future AI develop unfettered is most certainly a recipe for disaster.

This, though, connects to another thought in the Pope's statement. He writes that "technology is never neutral." One could argue that, by extension, AI isn't neutral either.

As generative AI inches closer to general artificial intelligence (GAI), or something approximating human intelligence, it does not necessarily shed the initial bias of its early training (or as the Pope wrote, "the characteristics of those who devise, finance, regulate and use it").

In the last few years, OpenAI and Google have worked diligently to rid ChatGPT and Gemini, respectively, of bias, but there are so many avenues — data collection, labelling, training, how the systems are deployed — through which bias can causally enter the training that it's hard to believe they've scrubbed it all.

AI unfettered

Even as they do the work, the Pope's point resonates. After all, AI remains largely unregulated, with states in the US and governing bodies like the European Union playing catch-up, and working, as bureaucracy often does, at about a third of the speed of AI development (see 'AI Time'); which means it's up to us to remember that AI and tech are not inherently good or bad, and also not neutral.

The goal, then, should be for humans to act as the filter, constantly questioning how we're using these tools, and thinking about what the prompt answer(s) mean. But we also must consider whether AI understands our goal, and if it takes into account broader perspectives and ramifications. The answers to those questions will likely be no, which means it's our job to take a closer look at the end product AI is delivering, and then process it for human consumption.

To be fair to the companies building these AI systems, the notion of tech neutrality and trust is not novel to AI. After all, the advent of broadband, access to the world's information, social media, and misinformation at scale predates generative AI access by decades.

We are not by nature a discerning people. We take the information provided on our various platforms for granted. No wonder, then, that when AI started confidently telling us falsehoods or misrepresenting people, we took it as truth.

As Einstein never said, "I fear the day when the technology overlaps with our humanity. The world will only have a generation of idiots." It's a quote widely misattributed to the genius, but also a valuable reminder: tech and AI are tools, and if we don't get a handle on them, we're just a bunch of tools. The Pope could have written that, too.

• Pope Leo warned AI could create “new forms of dehumanization”
• The Vatican says “opaque algorithms” threaten humanity and social justice
• The Pope called for global ethical standards around artificial intelligence

The Catholic Church has entered the AI debate in dramatic fashion. In one of the strongest warnings about artificial intelligence yet from a global religious leader, Pope Leo cautioned that AI and “opaque algorithms” risk creating “new forms of dehumanization” if humanity loses control of the technology shaping modern life.

The remarks by Pope Leo XIV form part of his new encyclical called Magnifica Humanitas. An encyclical is a formal document issued by the Vatican and traditionally used to address major moral or social issues. This latest document is focused entirely on AI, ethics, and the growing power of tech companies.

While Silicon Valley continues racing to build increasingly powerful AI systems, the Pope’s intervention suggests the battle over artificial intelligence is no longer just about innovation or productivity — it is becoming a moral and philosophical fight over what it means to remain human.

The new Tower of Babel

Pope Leo’s Magnifica Humanitas: On Safeguarding the Human Person in the Time of Artificial Intelligence opens with a striking warning:

“Humanity, created by God in all its grandeur, is today facing a pivotal choice: either to construct a new Tower of Babel or to build the city in which God and humanity dwell together.”

In the biblical story of the Tower of Babel, humans attempt to build a structure tall enough to reach the heavens, an act of pride that ultimately leads to division and confusion.

Pope Leo XIV argues that modern AI development risks repeating that mistake if power and knowledge become concentrated in the hands of only a few companies and nations, widening the divide between those included in the digital revolution and those left behind.

Above all, the Pope calls for shared ethical standards rooted in social justice, warning that “a more moral AI is not enough if that morality is determined by a few”. He also stresses that the environmental impact of AI cannot be ignored, pointing to the enormous amounts of energy and water required to power modern AI systems.

A growing global AI backlash

This latest intervention represents the Vatican’s clearest and most direct challenge yet to the companies driving the AI boom.

The Pope also took the unusual step of personally presenting the document during an event at the Vatican attended by politicians, academics and technology leaders. Among those present was Christopher Olah, co-founder of Anthropic, the AI company behind Claude. The US-based AI firm that famously pulled out of a deal with the Pentagon and is now embroiled in a lawsuit with Donald Trump’s administration over being branded a "supply chain risk".

The timing is significant. Governments around the world are scrambling to regulate artificial intelligence while companies such as OpenAI, Google, and Meta continue pushing toward increasingly powerful AI systems. There is also a growing backlash against AI from the younger generation, especially when AI is mentioned in graduation speeches, fueled by AI's impact on their employment prospects.

For years, most conversations about AI have focused on what the technology can do. Pope Leo’s message arrives at a moment when the debate is increasingly centered on who gets to control it, the risks of that control remaining in the hands of a few tech companies, and what happens if humanity gives away too much of itself in the process.

• Andrej Karpathy joins Anthropic, bolstering its Anthropic's pre-training team
• The move could be seen as a vote of confidence as Anthropic reportedly prepares for a sub-trillion-dollar IPO
• Top talent in the AI research industry is being aggressively poached, even as AI spend remains a focus and key concern for financial markets

OpenAI co-founder Andrej Karpathy has found a new home at Anthropic, joining the company’s pre-training team.

The storied AI researcher, who has previously worked as Tesla’s AI lead, also started an AI education company (Eureka Labs) and has been responsible for the coining of the term ‘vibe coding’, which has caught on as the de facto term for allowing AI to do most of the heavy lifting while ‘coding’ an application, often based on prompts alone.

What makes Karpathy one of the most sought-after names in the business is possibly his versatility: he has not only worked at OpenAI and Tesla, but also interned at Google’s DeepMind team while researching neural networks as part of his PhD at Stanford.

Andrej Karpathy to head his own team in Anthropic's pretraining division

In a post on X announcing the move, Karpathy stated: “Personal update: I've joined Anthropic. I think the next few years at the frontier of LLMs will be especially formative. I am very excited to join the team here and get back to R&D. I remain deeply passionate about education and plan to resume my work on it in time.”

Nick Joseph, who has previously worked on OpenAI’s safety team and is currently head of its pretraining team, took to X to congratulate him on the move: “Excited to welcome Andrej to the Pretraining team! He'll be building a team focused on using Claude to accelerate pretraining research itself. I can’t think of anyone better suited to do it — looking forward to what we build together!”

An increasingly competitive market for AI researchers

Karpathy’s move comes even as competition to hire the best AI talent has fiercely increased over the past few months. Meta is reportedly offering billion-dollar buyouts to companies to secure researchers for its teams, even as researchers flock to other organizations for a variety of reasons, including ethics, access to compute, and perceived leadership.

This, as Anthropic’s Claude has made several breakthroughs in recent months, catching up to and often exceeding performance metrics versus rival offerings from labs such as Google and OpenAI.

Its more focused offerings, such as the security-centric Mythos and integrations, continue to pave the way forward to the company’s growing revenue and clout in the industry.

• Anthropic set to brief the FSB on Mythos' capabilities
• Financial experts are worried attackers could exploit vulnerabilities in banking software
• Banks and lenders have been told to improve their detection and patching of vulnerabilities exposed by AI models

Anthropic is due to present a briefing to the Financial Stability Board (FSB) on the vulnerabilities and flaws the Mythos AI model has exposed “in every major operating system and web browser.”

The FSB is a global watchdog which works with finance ministry officials, central bankers and securities regulators across the G20.

In the announcement for Project Glasswing, Anthropic’s collaborative effort to secure the world’s critical software, the company warned that “The fallout — for economies, public safety and national security — could be severe.”

Mythos could threaten the global banking system

According to two people familiar with the matter, who spoke to the Financial Times, Andrew Bailey, governor of the Bank of England, invited Anthropic to present the capabilities and findings of Mythos to the FSB.

Many members of the FSB are growing increasingly concerned that AI models designed to hunt for high-severity vulnerabilities could threaten the stability of the global banking system, and in turn the global economy, if adversaries manage to obtain an AI model such as Mythos or OpenAI’s Daybreak, and abuse flaws in banking software.

Anthropic has provided Mythos to around 40 companies to enable them to secure their software against critical vulnerabilities. Mozilla found and patched 423 Firefox security bugs in a single month after harnessing Mythos onto the web browser, including some that had been prevalent in the code for over 15 years.

Many more companies have requested access and briefings on Mythos’ capabilities, but a Trump administration request has prevented Anthropic from distributing the software further.

The race is now on to patch AI-discovered vulnerabilities as quickly as possible before adversaries and state-sponsored threat actors further develop their own capabilities.

While AI models such as Mythos are not yet a part of the threat actors toolkit, Google recently observed attackers using an AI model to discover a zero-day exploit chain for the first time.

Most people use ChatGPT like a smarter search engine: type a question, get an answer, move on. But after months of using AI tools every single day, I’ve realized something that a lot of people miss — tiny changes to the way you phrase prompts can completely transform the quality of the responses you get back.

Eventually, you start to figure out these things yourself through trial and error, but it's a lot easier if somebody gives you a head start. So, here are the best hacks I've discovered that produce better, more meaningful results from ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and other AI chatbots.

The best part is that they’re not long, complicated prompts you need to copy and paste constantly. Instead, they’re simple phrases you can add either at the start of a chat or at the end of your request — almost as an afterthought — but they can make a surprisingly big difference to the kind of answers you get back.

1. Make no assumptions

One thing you quickly notice when using ChatGPT is that it can sometimes go off in strange directions because it only has the information you’ve written in your prompt. To fill in the gaps, it makes assumptions — and those assumptions aren’t always correct.

Quite often, the AI will ask clarifying questions before answering, but you can make sure it happens more consistently by adding these two sentences to the end of your prompt.

Just type: “Make no assumptions. Ask me for clarification before you begin.”

It’s a tiny change, but it can produce far more accurate and on-point responses.

2. Make me a prompt to have you...

You can actually ask AI to create prompts for you to use on itself. As strange as it sounds, AI is actually very good at figuring out the best wording to get stronger results from itself.

For example, using ChatGPT, I tried: “Make me a prompt to have you tell me the most important news stories with an emphasis on sport.”

ChatGPT then produced an impressively detailed prompt for me to paste back into a new chat — one that not only gathered the day’s major sports stories, but also highlighted online arguments, controversies, and underreported talking points.

Here it is:

Act as my personal news editor. Give me a concise roundup of the most important news stories from the last 24 hours, ranked by significance and public impact. Prioritize sport heavily — especially major football, combat sports, Formula 1, tennis, and big international events — but also include any genuinely major world news, tech, politics, science, or culture stories that people will likely be talking about today.

For each story:

•Give a punchy headline

•Explain why it matters in 2–4 sentences

•Include key context or consequences

•Flag if the story is controversial, surprising, historic, or likely to dominate social media

•Separate confirmed facts from speculation or rumors

Structure it like a smart morning briefing rather than a dry newswire.

Finish with:

•“What everyone online is arguing about”

•“One underreported story worth watching”

•“Biggest sports talking point of the day”

Keep the tone sharp, informed, and readable — like a mix of a newsroom briefing and a really good sports desk editor.

3. No em dashes

Typing “No em dashes” is a surprisingly effective instruction if you’re tired of ChatGPT constantly using em dashes (—) in its writing.

There’s nothing inherently wrong with em dashes — I use them myself — but ChatGPT is extremely fond of them, and once you notice it, you start seeing them everywhere.

If you never want to see another em dash again, try adding something like: “Remember to never use em dashes at all.”

If memory is enabled, ChatGPT may even remember the preference long-term.

4. Act like a brutally honest mentor

If you want unfiltered feedback on a business idea, article draft, creative project, or long-term plan, try starting your prompt with: “Act like a brutally honest mentor.”

This tends to push ChatGPT away from its usual overly supportive tone and toward more critical, direct feedback. The results can genuinely be useful because the AI starts pointing out weaknesses, blind spots, and unrealistic assumptions instead of simply encouraging everything.

That said, be warned: it can occasionally feel a little brutal.

5. Explain this to me like I’m five

There are countless versions of this prompt floating around online, but the variation I always come back to is simply: “Explain this to me like I’m five.”

For complicated subjects, it’s one of the fastest ways to cut through jargon and understand the core idea underneath. Whether it’s quantum physics, mortgages, AI models, or tax systems, forcing ChatGPT to simplify concepts often reveals whether something actually makes sense or was just buried under complicated language.

Some subjects are just easier to understand when they’re explained like a bedtime story.

Getting better results

The funny thing about AI chatbots is that most people only use a tiny fraction of what they’re capable of. A lot of the difference between a frustrating answer and a genuinely useful one comes down to how you phrase the request.

That’s why these little prompt hacks matter. None of them are complicated, but they change the way ChatGPT responds — whether that means asking better questions, giving more honest feedback, simplifying difficult ideas, or tailoring its writing style to what you actually want.

This week was a big one for software as we got official (and unofficial) teases for the next iteration of Android and iOS.

We also heard that the seemingly ill-fated Trump Phone might actually be coming after all, though we wouldn't be surprised if it gets delayed again by the time you're reading this.

Before you catch up with this week’s tech news, why not test yourself on last week’s seven biggest tech stories to see how well you were paying attention? Take the quiz below.

7. The Trump phone has landed?

Last week, we highlighted reports that the Trump Phone looked to have cemented itself in the vaporware category — with its new terms of service suggesting that a device may never actually ship, and that preorders don’t guarantee you a product. That now seems to have changed as the company announced "Phones start shipping this week!!!”

Now, until devices are in the hands of the people who bought one you’ll forgive us for remaining skeptical — the device’s release date has been shifted a few times now, and some people with preorders have been told shipping deadlines previously that have then been missed.

We write ICYMI on Friday, so it’s very possible that by the time you read this on Saturday morning, the Trump phone situation will have shifted yet again, but hopefully, this is the end of the Trump Phone saga. Though we can’t shake the feeling, this might merely be the close of act one.

• Read the full story: The long-promised Trump Mobile Phone is slated to arrive in consumers' hands this week

6. Philips made TV immersion cheaper

Smart lighting doesn’t just come with added convenience; it can also be a home entertainment immersion booster with gadgets like the Philips Hue Play HDMI Sync Box 8K — though if you’re after something more budget-friendly, Philips just debuted a non-Hue sync box.

The Philips Smart Lighting HDMI Sync Box 2.1 comes in two sizes — one for 55 to 65-inch TVs, and one for 75 to 85-inch TVs — and, instead of working with the HUE system, it integrates with WiZ-branded tech.

At under half the launch cost, this lightning solution could be perfect for the more budget-conscious amongst you who still want the immersion factor offered by TV sync tech once it starts rolling out in June.

• Read the full-story: Sync your lights with your TV for a lot less cash

5. Claude cracked a crypto wallet

A Bitcoin owner who believed he had permanently lost access to nearly $400,000 worth of cryptocurrency says Anthropic’s Claude AI helped recover the funds after more than a decade. The user had originally bought 5 Bitcoin when the cryptocurrency was worth around $250 each, but later changed the wallet password while in college and forgot it. After years of failed attempts — including trying trillions of password combinations — the owner uploaded files from an old computer into Claude as a final attempt.

It was able to locate an older wallet backup file that existed before the password change happened. Combined with an old mnemonic phrase the user had recently rediscovered, the recovered wallet file finally allowed access to the Bitcoin again.

• Read the full story: Claude AI helped a Bitcoin owner recover nearly $400,000

4. The Insta 360 Go 3S went Retro

This week, we saw the wackiest camera kit of 2026 so far: a Retro bundle of the Go 3S.

The action cam is ideal for when you need something tiny — it can slot in just about any small space, much easier than its rivals — but this kit makes it resemble an old Polaroid. You’ll get a viewfinder dock to help you compose shots (it doubles as a selfie mirror), but no LCD screen.

If you want a more modern feel and easier composition, the camera can still be paired with a smartphone via the Insta360 app.

The Go 3S Retro Bundle costs $300 / £279 / AU$470 for the 64GB version or $320 / £299 / AU$500 for the 128GB version. The latter feels like the obvious pick — you'll want as much internal storage as you can get because there's no card slot.

• Read the full-story: Insta360 reveals one of the wackiest camera kits for 2026

3. Ninja’s Slushi got twice as nice

What’s better than one Ninja Slushi? How about two side-by-side so that you can make dual-flavored, multicolored iced drinks at home? This week, Ninja released the Slushi Twist, which makes two different types of slush at the same time, then dispenses them in an attractive swirled pattern. Having two freezing chambers means it has a much larger capacity than the original Slushi, making it perfect for parties.

The Slushi Twist is on sale now in the US for $399.99, and although we don’t have international release dates yet, I’m sure it won’t be too long before it’s available worldwide. It certainly proved popular, and the first batch of stock sold out within hours. Don’t worry, though, you can sign up on Ninja’s website to be notified when more arrive.

• Read the full-story: Ninja doubles the freezing fun with the new Ninja Slushi Twist

2. iOS 27 was teased

Siri 2.0 has been a long (long!) time coming, but Apple’s revamped voice assistant finally looks set to debut in iOS 27 – and this week, we got a better idea of what it might actually look like.

According to Bloomberg’s resident Apple tipster Mark Gurman, Siri 2.0 will largely live within the Dynamic Island and display transparent results cards in response to your queries. If you need to go deeper into a query, you’ll be able to swipe that results card to bring up an iMessage-like chat interface, and there will also be a dedicated Siri app, where you can access your conversation history or upload images and documents.

Other rumored iOS 27 features include an updated, AI-powered Spotlight Search tool and a redesigned Image Playground app, so it sounds like Apple could finally be about to take its seat at the AI table.

• Read the full-story: Siri 2.0 could arrive with iOS 27

1. Android 17 was showcased

Just a week before Google I/O kicks off, the Android team dedicated an entire show to debuting new features set to drop with Android 17, a boatload of Gemini integrations, and an entirely new platform.

In terms of Android 17 is set to bring a lot, including a new take on curbing screen time and easing phone addiction called Pause Point. Rather than just locking you out of an app, it might show photos or suggest a breathing exercise. There's also an easy way to film screen recordings with your own talking head in the corner, which might be really handy for content creators.

Gemini Intelligence is set to make AI even more useful and helpful across a whole barrage of tasks, and honestly, it sounds pretty close to what Apple promised with Apple Intelligence. This new suite of AI functionality that's integrated at the system level of the OS will also be found on forthcoming Googlebooks. Essentially, these new laptops run a combination of Android and ChromeOS. And while this is a ton, it's likely we'll hear even more about it at Google I/O.

• Read the full-story: 7 best Android 17 upgrades announced at The Android Show

• Microsoft engineers given until June 30 to switch from Claude Code to GitHub Copilot CLI
• Ties with GitHub mean Microsoft can shape Copilot CLI to its own needs
• Claude models will remain available in Copilot CLI and other AI tools

Microsoft is reportedly canceling most of the Claude Code license it uses internally, despite the Anthropic tool becoming somewhat of a hit among both workers and the community in general.

The use of Anthropic licenses may come as a shock given the company's extensive history with, and investments in, OpenAI, but that could be about to change as the company shifts direction to push its own alternative.

Engineers are now being told to use GitHub Copilot CLI, with users given a June 30 2026 deadline to remove Claude Code from their workflows.

Microsoft tells engineers to use GitHub Copilot CLI, not Claude Code

Although the company has not publicly explained the reasons behind its decision, the June 30 deadline aligns with the end of Microsoft's fiscal year. Shifting to a company-owned alternative could realize huge cost savings.

GitHub Copilot CLI would offer tighter integration with Microsoft repos and better alignment with its own enterprise security expectations, given that Microsoft could effectively tailor GitHub to its own needs.

"Claude Code was an important part of that learning," EVP Rajesh Jha explained (via The Verge). "At the same time, Copilot CLI has given us something especially important: a product we can help shape directly with GitHub for Microsoft’s repos, workflows, security expectations, and engineering needs."

As for Claude Code, it seems that Anthropic's alternative has proven to be a big hit among workers. Developers reportedly prefer it over Copilot CLI, and even non-engineers have started testing it out. Microsoft had previously encouraged employees with limited coding knowledge to experiment with Claude Code.

Although GitHub will be the favored ecosystem going forward, Claude models will remain available through Copilot CLI. In fact, the company has a growing partnership with Anthropic that even sees Claude models being offered through consumer-facing Copilot and M365 features as it looks to diversify following a partial distancing from OpenAI.

• A Bitcoin holder says Anthropic’s Claude AI helped recover nearly $400,000 in lost Bitcoin
• The wallet had been locked for more than a decade
• Claude identified an older wallet backup file hidden among years of forgotten computer files

For more than a decade, a Bitcoin wallet sat untouched on an old computer while its owner assumed the money inside was effectively gone forever. This week, that same wallet suddenly became worth nearly $400,000 again after its owner claimed Anthropic’s Claude AI assistant helped recover access to the funds.

The story spread rapidly after the owner described using Claude to sift through files from an old college computer and uncover the missing pieces needed to unlock 5 Bitcoin that had been inaccessible for years.

You can view the users tweet, but be aware that his language is somewhat explicit.

The owner originally bought Bitcoin when the cryptocurrency traded around $250 per coin. Later, during college, he changed the wallet password while high and promptly lost track of it. Years of recovery attempts followed, including reportedly trying trillions of password combinations without success.

After years of failure, the user said he uploaded files from his old computer into Claude as a final, desperate attempt. Instead of somehow “hacking” Bitcoin, the chatbot reportedly identified an older wallet backup file that existed before the password change happened. Combined with an old mnemonic phrase the user had recently rediscovered, the recovered wallet file finally allowed access to the Bitcoin again.

AI archaeology

The story sounds ridiculous because it is ridiculous. But it also points toward something increasingly important about how AI systems may end up fitting into ordinary digital life.

Claude did not break Bitcoin encryption, despite what some online are claiming. Instead, the recovery worked because the user still possessed fragments of access information across old files and forgotten backups. Claude simply helped organize the chaos more effectively. AI models are good at that kind of navigation through scattered information.

Most people have ancient hard drives, cloud accounts, USB sticks, or forgotten laptops containing years of disconnected information. Usually, those archives are useless clutter. Occasionally, they contain something extremely important that the owner no longer remembers how to piece together. Claude could sift through the data and never got bored.

Enticing tales

The story and its happy ending are a boon for AI companies like Anthropic as they try to entice people into loyally using their models. Stories like this help reinforce the idea that conversational AI can function as a practical reasoning assistant capable of helping untangle real-world problems.

The lucky Bitcoin owner leaned into that idea himself by joking that he planned to name his future child after Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei.

And it is true that when so many people can relate to carrying Byzantine and messy digital histories, an efficient inspection tool is very appealing. AI may become more commonly used because it helps humans navigate their overwhelming digital clutter, not because it can replicate human thinking.

As the furore over losing ChatGPT-4o has shown, people don’t like it when AI presents robotic outputs, overly generic answers, or starts to sound stiff and defensive. I’ve found that the solution to avoiding this with later ChatGPT models is to use the principles from Dale Carnegie's How to Win Friends and Influence People because it has dramatically improved the quality of responses I get from ChatGPT.

Carnegie classic 1936 book reduces human interaction down into a set of practical social principles. A lot of modern management training, sales advice, networking culture traces back to them. If I were to boil the book down to a simple piece of advice, it would be that people respond better to encouragement and self-interest than blunt correction.

The strange thing is that Carnegie’s principles work perfectly on ChatGPT, because modern AI has been trained so heavily on human conversational expectations. That means that advice written for human relationships in 1936 now improves interactions with machines today.

I'm using ChatGPT, but these tips apply equally to Gemini, Claude, CoPilot or whatever chatbot you're using.

Fundamental techniques in handling people, and AI

Carnegie suggests that we don't criticize, condemn, or complain, and give honest and sincere appreciation so we can arouse in the other person an eager desire to be helpful. Let’s look at five of Carnegie’s principles, one by one, and see how we can apply them to AI chatbots. I’ll give an example of a weak and better prompt for each, where I can.

1. “Begin in a friendly way”

In terms of AI, this means we need to give emotional context and intent before we demand it starts a task.

Weak prompt: “Rewrite this email”.

Better prompt: “I’m trying to sound warm and professional without sounding stiff. Can you help me rewrite this email?”

The result of doing it this way is often better tone matching, less robotic phrasing and fewer weird over-corrections. It turns out that ChatGPT performs better when it understands why you’re asking, not just what you want.

2. “Talk in terms of the other person’s interests”

This is probably the strongest principle for AI prompt engineering, and it means you need to explain the end goal before you ask for a response.

Weak prompt: “Summarize this document.”

Better prompt: ”Summarize this document so I can turn it into a short email for non-technical readers.”

Adding the end goal will result in more useful summaries, strong framing and less generic filler from ChatGPT. Think of it this way — the best prompts are more like briefings to a work colleague than commands to a robot.

3. “Be a good listener”

Most people are using ChatGPT backwards — they’re rushing straight to answers instead of turning it into more of a conversation. This one works brilliantly with follow-up prompting. Instead of dumping instructions, let the AI ask clarifying questions.

Prompt: “Before answering, ask me three questions that would help improve the result.”

Try this more often and you’ll notice that you get dramatically more personal answers, less hallucinated assumptions and more usable results.

4. “Give honest and sincere appreciation”

The idea of giving appreciation to ChatGPT sounds ridiculous at first, but positive reinforcement helps refine outputs.

For example, replying to something that wasn’t quite right with: “That structure was really close to what I wanted. Can you keep that same tone but make it shorter and punchier?” Gets much better results than simply “Try again, but shorter”.

By telling ChatGPT what it is about the last response you actually liked and what it did well, you get more consistency and less drift between versions. Even though the AI doesn’t have feelings, conversational reinforcement still shapes the interaction.

5. “Try honestly to see things from the other person’s point of view”

Converting this principle into something you can use with ChatGPT means assigning perspective and audience to your prompts.

Weak prompt: ”Explain quantum computing.”

Better prompt: “Explain quantum computing from the perspective of someone who finds physics intimidating and usually avoids technical subjects.”

I’ve also seen versions of this where you ask ChatGPT to explain it as if you’re reassuring a confused friend, not lecturing a classroom. It results in clearer explanations, less jargon and a more human-feeling response.

Try these tips the next time you interact with your AI chatbot of choice. You’ll find that Dale Carnegie’s principles work because modern AI has effectively been trained to simulate cooperative human conversation. It’s a strange paradox that the more conversational AI becomes, the more old-fashioned social skills start working on machines too.

• Claude for Small Business connects with popular software like Quickbooks and Google Workspace
• 15 agentic workflows and 15 skills have already been built by Anthropic for SMBs
• A US upskilling tour will train 100 leaders per stop and include Claude Max subscriptions

Anthropic has launched Claude for Small Business, which packages AI connectors, purpose-build workflows and other automation tools into a suite designed to help SMBs and solopreneurs get the most out of AI.

The new SMB package connects the increasingly popular chatbot with some of the most widely used software, including Quickbooks, PayPal, HubSpot, Canva, Docusign, Google Workspace and Microsoft 365.

Claude's new pre-built SMB connectors have been designed to make the chatbot more plug-and-play, catering to smaller businesses that don't have the time or money to build out their own customizations.

Claude for Small Business ships with pre-built connectors and more

"Small businesses make up nearly half the American economy, but they've never had the resources of bigger companies," Anthropic President Daniela Amodei explained.

"Instead of jumping across multiple image generation tools, we built a single place for users to easily generate, personalize and publish on-brand designs," Canva GM and Head of Ecosystem Anwar Haneef commented, referring to the availability of third-party tools directly within Claude's interface.

We also already know that SMBs make up around 99% of all UK businesses, thus the SMB offers a huge expansion opportunity for Anthropic.

Key to this SMB offering are 15 "ready-to-run" agentic workflows covering finance, operations, sales, marketing, HR and customer service, as well as another 15 skills designed to tackle some of the biggest paint points cited by small businesses.

Positioning the new product as an attempt to close the AI adoption gap between large enterprises and small companies, Anthropic is also planning to support those with fewer resources with training opportunities. Coinciding with the launch of Claude for Small Business is an 'SMB Tour' – a scheme that'll visit at least 10 US cities with free half-day AI workshops, targeting around 100 local business leaders per stop.

As part of the tour, attendees will also get a month's free Claude Max, worth around $100. As for Claude for Business, it's a bundle of integrations that sits on top of existing subscription tiers, rather than being its own standalone tier, allowing businesses to pick the right level for their needs.

• Anthropic is adding 20+ MCP connectors and 12 plugins to Claude for legal workers
• They'll be available across Claude, Claude Cowork and other third-party office apps
• Claude continues to get new industry-specific releases

Anthropic has lifted the wraps off a series of tools and plugins designed specifically for the legal space, including more than 20 MCP connectors to link Claude to dedicated legal software and 12 plugins to tackle specific workflows.

With connections to the likes of DocuSign, LexisNexis, Thomson Reuters and Everlaw, it means Claude can access things like case files, research tools and other documents for fuller context.

This comes amid rising engagement from legal workers, with Anthropic now declaring that they're the "most engaged Claude Cowork users of any knowledge-work function."

Anthropic's latest push is for the legal sector

In its announcement, Anthropic explained the current legal system relies on a complex mix of systems that create silos and fragmentation across workflows, thus tying them together with connectors and plugins will aim to streamline many processes.

As for how they work, the MCP connectors focus on bringing context into Claude from documents, communications and records, while plugins focus on packaging frequently-run tasks to make them quicker in future iterations.

Anthropic also stressed that, because they're built on open protocols, law firms can adapt them specifically to how they work rather than be tied to Claude's way of working.

However, rather than being restricted to Claude's chatbot interface, Anthropic is embedding these tools into wherever Claude works, including across Word, Outlook, Excel and PowerPoint. Those connectors and plugins are also available within the agentic Claude Cowork platform, where lawyers can automate repetitive and administrative work to focus on their cases.

The new legal tools come shortly after the company launched a similar suite for finance workers, with AI companies now going after industry-specific use cases rather than relying on general- and multi-purpose AI chatbots.

• Crooks abused Claude’s “Shared Chats” feature to plant fake install instructions leading to infostealer infections
• Fraudulent chats were promoted via Google Ads, showing authentic Claude URLs to trick Mac users
• Campaign used ClickFix tactics, spoofed “Apple Support,” and avoided targeting Russian‑language systems

Cybercriminals are abusing legitimate Claude and Google Ads services to trick Mac users into installing infostealing malware on their devices, experts have warned.

A new campaign was recently spotted, and disclosed, by security researcher Berk Albayrak on LinkedIn, concerning a feature called “Shared Claude Chats”, which allows users to create clickable links of previous conversations they’ve had with the AI. That way, other people can view those specific chat sessions through a public URL.

According to Albayrak, the hackers have created conversations in which the platform shows instructions on how to install Claude Code (a command-line coding assistant). However, the instructions are nothing but the standard ClickFix scam - they tell the user to bring up the Terminal and paste a command, which triggers a chain reaction resulting in an infostealer infection.

Advertising the scam on Google

The conversation was created by an account named “Apple Support”, likely to increase its legitimacy. Those with a shaper eye, however, could easily spot the trick, since the chat has a disclaimer at the top, warning the content below might be “unverified or unsafe”.

But creating the fraudulent conversation is just half the process - victims must still somehow land there.

That’s where Google Ads come in. The crooks were able to purchase ads on Google’s advertising network, meaning people searching for “Claude Code on Mac” would be served this chat at the very top of the search engine results page. To make matters worse, those who would hover over the link or double-check where it leads, would see “claude.ai” - the authentic Claude URL.

Albayrak did not say how many people might have been compromised this way, but BleepingComputer found the malware does not work on computers with Russian language, suggesting that the miscreants are actively avoiding targeting Russians.

• A spoofed site (claude-pro[.]com) delivers poisoned installers that sideload DonutLoader and the Beagle backdoor
• The operation mimics legitimate Claude software, likely tied to PlugX operators using DLL sideloading
• Researchers warn of malicious ads and SEO poisoning, urging users to verify links before downloading

If you’re looking to download the Claude client on Windows, be careful, because there are fake and malicious versions out there looking to exploit interest in new AI models.

Security researchers from Sophos have flagged how one such alleged Claude Pro offering led them to a website “claude-pro[.]com”. The site itself was built to look identical to the legitimate claude.ai official website, but the researchers determined it was fake rather quickly, as none of the links or buttons on the site, aside from the download one, worked - all redirecting back to the homepage.

Those who didn’t spot the scam, and clicked the download button, would end up with a working version of Claude - however, one which had been poisoned to also deliver an updater, and a DLL file. In classic DLL sideloading fashion, the updater runs the malicious DLL which, in turn, deploys a loader malware called DonutLoader.

Dropping Beagle

This tool, in turn, fetched a “relatively simple backdoor” called Beagle, capable of running commands, uploading and downloading files, creating directories, uninstalling agents, and more.

Sophos could not attribute this campaign to any particular threat actor, but they did say that it was most likely operated by the same people who are running PlugX.

PlugX is a remote access trojan (RAT) usually used by Chinese state-linked threat groups to spy on victims, steal data, and maintain persistent access to compromised systems. The malware is described as being highly adaptable and modular, allowing attackers to execute commands, capture screenshots, log keystrokes, and move laterally across networks. It has been active for more than a decade and is one of the longer-running RATs out there.

The attackers most likely planned to run malicious ads and SEO poisoning to reach their targets, so make sure to double-check the links in your search engine before visiting any websites.

• OpenAI introduces GPT‑5.5‑Cyber following uproar around Anthropic Mythos
• It's a modest upgrade focused on permissive cybersecurity tasks like vuln triage and malware analysis
• Access is limited to vetted teams in the Trusted Access for Cyber (TAC) program, unlike Anthropic’s more restricted Mythos Preview

OpenAI has introduced GPT-5.5-Cyber, an upgraded cybersecurity model looking to take some of the shine off Anthropic's Mythos Preview release.

Coming less than a month after the launch of GPT-5.4-Cyber, this is not a major upgrade by any means, and users should not expect many changes, OpenAI explained.

instead, users should expect a model trained to be more permissive when it comes to cybersecurity tasks, making it easier to use for things like vulnerability identification, triage, patch validation, and malware analysis.

Competing with Mythos

“GPT‑5.5‑Cyber lets a smaller set of partners study advanced workflows where specialized access behavior may matter,” OpenAI said in a blog post.

“The cyber defense ecosystem is broad, and GPT‑5.5 and GPT‑5.5‑Cyber play different roles in meeting the needs of organizations and researchers across it, depending on the task, the setting, and the safeguards around how the model is used. For most teams, GPT‑5.5 with TAC is our strongest broadly useful model for legitimate defensive work, with strong safeguards against misuse.”

As with the previous version, this edition will only be given only to vetted cybersecurity teams. However, unlike its key competitor - Mythos, which was given to only a handful of companies, OpenAI’s model will be offered to a broader set of users, members of the Trusted Access for Cyber (TAC) program.

Back when it introduced GPT-5.4-Cyber, OpenAI said it was scaling TAC to “thousands of verified individual defenders and hundreds of teams responsible for defending critical software."

Anthropic first disclosed Project Glasswing in early April 2026, saying that the AI model Mythos Preview was too powerful to be given freely. Apparently, it was able to surface decades-old vulnerabilities in some of the most widely-used operating systems in existence, and chain them together to create working exploits.

• 10 new finance-specific AI agents have been launched by Anthropic
• You can also use Claude directly within Excel and other Office apps
• Claude Opus 4.7 performs better than GPT-5.5 and Gemini 3.1 Pro

Anthropic has launched 10 prebuilt AI agents designed for banks, insurers and other financial institutions to help speed up some of the most time-consuming tasks within the industry.

Available through a number of the company's offerings, including Claude Cowork, Claude Code and Claude Managed Agents, these purpose-built agents are designed to be deployed in "days rather than months."

The Claude maker also used the announcement to remind finance workers that Claude is now available directly within Microsoft Excel and other Office apps.

Anthropic launches purpose-built finance agents

Each of the 10 agents is made up of three separate elements: skills (a set of instructions), connectors and subagents, which Anthropic describes as "additional Claude models that are called upon by the main agent, for specific sub-tasks such as comparables selection or methodology checks."

However, with the finance industry being as regulated as it is, companies can also choose to tweak and refine these agents to suit their own needs.

Available through the marketplace, five are destined to work across research and client coverage, and the other five are for finance and operations. Some highlights include a pitch builder agent, a market researcher agent and a valuation reviewer agent.

Anthropic also described Claude Opus 4.7, the model that powers the new agents and Excel connectors, as "state-of-the-art on financial tasks." It scored 64.37% on Vals AI's Finance Agent benchmark, far ahead of GPT-5.5 (59.96%) and Gemini 3.1 Pro (59.72%).

As for the data Anthropic's new finance agents can access, FactSet, S&P Capital IQ, MSCI, PitchBook, Morningstar, Chronograph, LSEG and Daloopa are just some of the "dozens of market data, research platforms, and financial companies’ internal systems" that are accessed via connectors for real-time data.

The new Claude agents are available across all paid plans for Claude Cowork and Claude Code – but they're still in public beta as Managed Agents for programmatic use.

• Testing from OmniCalculator suggests Claude and ChatGPT are not the smartest
• The report finds Grok 4.2 performs best in logic and problem-solving
• Claude still leads in writing quality and tone

ChatGPT is still the most popular AI chatbot around, even with the exodus that's underway to Claude, but is it the cleverest? A new report from OmniCalculator suggests that ChatGPT might not be the smartest AI around.

When it comes to the quantifiable math ability of these AI chatbots, the smartest free AI model is, rather surprisingly, Grok. xAI's Grok 4.2 model specifically. That doesn't mean anything about its writing style and ability, or anything else chatbots can do, but it does suggest that it might have the edge in math prowess.

Claude's winning style

Claude’s recent rise in popularity has been driven by people wanting to quit ChatGPT over unpopular AI military deals, but also by how it composes answers and writes its responses.

The quality is hard to quantify compared to math skills, but easy to recognize. The OmniCalculator report highlighted Claude 4.6 as the best at it, able to process and respond to long documents without losing coherence and maintaining a consistent voice throughout. For the average person, this is much more important than which AI can make it through complicated logic and math problems.

It even comes out in the facsimiles of personality offered by the AI models. Claude is more willing to acknowledge uncertainty, which can make its answers feel measured rather than overconfident. That tone can create the impression of deeper thinking, regardless of any underlying reasoning.

Legacy models, including earlier versions of ChatGPT and Claude, were found to revise or second-guess their own answers roughly 60% of the time in complex problem-solving scenarios. That kind of instability does not always show up in casual use, but it becomes obvious when you push these systems through multi-step reasoning tasks where consistency matters.

But Grok 4.2 cuts that instability rate down to 33.1%, meaning it is far less likely to backtrack or alter its conclusions mid-process. That's great for reasoning and logic, but not much help in mimicking the smooth tones that make other models feel more polished.

Specialist subjects

The distinction in ability is not trivial. Good writing and strong reasoning skills (or the AI facsimiles of the same) are related skills, but they are not identical. A model can produce elegant prose while making subtle errors in logic. Another can arrive at the correct answer but converse in clunky ways that seem very obsolete.

The margins are narrow, though, and no model performs flawlessly. Even the top performers make mistakes, sometimes on relatively simple problems. The idea of a single smartest AI is a bit nonsensical in that way. The clear winner in one context can fall back in another.

And there's no such thing as a permanent winner. Each of the leading models occupies a slightly different space. Similarly, the underlying complexity of what people mean by intelligence is complex and ever-evolving. Which AI chatbot to rely on is situational. The best model for drafting an email may not be the best one for solving a technical problem. The most reliable assistant for coding might not produce the most natural-sounding text.

As competition intensifies, companies are likely to lean further into their strengths, refining specific capabilities rather than chasing an all-purpose solution. The result could be a landscape where specialization matters as much as scale. So the question of which AI is smartest will probably always have the answer, "depends."

• ChatGPT passes “strawberry” test but fails when switched to “cranberry”
• AI still struggles with simple letter-counting despite broader improvements
• Reasoning tests like “car wash” still expose gaps in AI logic

There are a number of viral posts from people astonished that chatbots like ChatGPT and Claude can solve complex equations but struggle with something as simple as counting the number of “r”s in the word “strawberry”. Well, those days could finally be over.

With the words "At long last", the official ChatGPTapp X account proudly announced today that it can now count the number of “r”s in “strawberry” — a laughably easy task for humans that has traditionally been difficult for AIs to get right.

However, users very quickly found that you could still trip it up by swapping out “strawberry” for “cranberry”.

“Not so fast,” said X user @NathanEspinoza_ in response to ChatGPTapp’s boastful post about solving the strawberry problem, as he posted an image showing ChatGPT had responded saying that there was only one "r" in "cranberry".

To corroborate the result, I quickly tried the same thing with my version of ChatGPT on GPT-5.5, and I was told there were two "r"s — a different result, but still wrong. It passed the “strawberry” test perfectly, saying there were three “r”s, but then claimed there were only two in “cranberry”. To its credit, ChatGPT did admit its mistake when I questioned it, putting it down to a simple “counting error”.

Why the strawberry problem exists

There are a few very simple questions that chatbots are notoriously bad at answering, one of which is “how many ‘r’s are in strawberry?”

This is a straightforward counting task for humans, but it’s surprisingly difficult for AI systems. The reason comes down to how they process language. Large language models (LLMs) are built on transformers, which convert words like “strawberry” into numerical representations. Those representations capture meaning and context, but they don’t inherently preserve a clear sense of the individual letters that make up the word.

The fact that ChatGPT is still stumbling over “cranberry” suggests the solution may have been hard-coded for specific cases, rather than reflecting a broader improvement in how the LLM handles these kinds of questions.

The car wash problem

The second boast in ChatGPTapp’s post is that ChatGPT can now solve the car wash problem. This exploits a context gap in how LLMs reason, by asking whether it would be quicker to walk to a car wash or drive if it’s “only 50 meters away”. Most models will tell you it’s quicker to walk, missing the obvious issue that you need your car with you to wash it.

ChatGPTapp claims that ChatGPT will now catch this error and point it out. But when I tried it using the latest GPT-5.5 model, it still recommended walking — as did Claude using Sonnet 4.6. When I tested it in Gemini, however, it pointed out that while walking would be quicker, you’d need to bring the car with you if the goal was to wash it.

Grok did even better. Not only did it flag the issue of not bringing the car, but it added that “this question has become a popular test for whether someone (or an AI) grasps the actual goal versus giving generic ‘walking is healthier/shorter/greener’ advice that ignores the context.”

So, for now at least, that’s a win for Gemini and Grok. But if fixing “strawberry” doesn’t fix “cranberry”, it raises a bigger question — are these models actually getting smarter, or just getting better at passing the tests we keep throwing at them?

• Anthropic is announcing a series of new creative connectors for Claude
• One single Adobe connector opens up access to 50+ pro-grade tools
• Others include Blender, Ableton, Autodesk, Splice and Canva

Adobe and Anthropic have announced plans to integrate professional creative tools straight into the Claude interface to give Anthropic customers access to the Creative Cloud suite without having to switch apps.

It's part of a broader rollout of Claude connectors being rolled out across the creative space, including Blender and Ableton, to democratize and simplify access to some of the most specialized design apps out there.

The Adobe connector was announced after the company's annual Summit event, which largely focused on the future of marketing, and builds on existing AI links like the Photoshop app within ChatGPT.

Anthropic is going after the creative space with Claude connectors

As for the Adobe connector specifically, Claude gets access to more than 50 pro-grade tools across popular apps like Photoshop, Illustrator, Premiere, Lightroom, Firefly and more. Users can retouch and enhance photos, create assets for social media campaigns and resize their videos for multiple platforms from within Claude, without having to understand some of the complex workflows of each specific app.

Because the work is being done via Adobe tools within the Claude interface, and not by Claude directly, it means users can pick up inside the actual Adobe apps if they want to deepen their edits and so on.

Available globally, users will need a Claude account to access the Adobe connector. Higher usage limits, access to more tools and the ability to save your work across sessions comes with signing in to an Adobe account, but it seems that signing in isn't necessary for some of the most basic functionalities.

But while Adobe's connector hits the headlines for making powerful editing more accessible to non-technical, non-creative workers, it's not the only creative connector Anthropic is adding to Claude. As well as Abelton and Blender mentioned above, Affinity by Canva, Autodesk Fusion, Resolume Arena, Resolume Wire, SketchUp and Splice are also coming to Claude.

All of this, Anthropic says, without replacing the taste and imagination of creatives. Instead, the company sees these connectors helping them to replace repetitive tasks and manual toil, freeing them up to take on larger-scale projects.