They did a whole PR cycle about how dangerous their technology was. They refused to release it for public consumption.
How is this “targeting”? It’s literally what was requested.
How is this “targeting”? It’s literally what was requested.
Based on the reasoning for blocking Fable, every current model should be blocked. GPT 5.5 is similarly strong and has fewer guardrails, for example.
> They were asking for regulation.
I've heard others call it a marketing ploy that AI companies keep coming back to-- the idea that "it's soooo dangerous, we have to be careful".
Yes, most likely, but not in this form, obviously. They want open weight models regulated for regulatory capture, and I'd assume they want an actually documented framework applied equally across all labs.
If GPT5.5 has the same capabilities Fable did, then for consistency sake, it should have also been subject to this ban.
Regulate or not regulate, but the government should not pick winners and losers.
> Regulate or not regulate, but the government should not pick winners and losers.