Anthropic pulls OpenAI's access to Claude — here's why
According to Wired, which broke this news, Anthropic spokesperson Christopher Nulty said: 'Claude Code has become the go-to choice for coders everywhere, and so it was no surprise to learn OpenAI's own technical staff were also using our coding tools ahead of the launch of the latest version of ChatGPT in GPT-5. Unfortunately, this is a direct violation of our terms of service.'
Anthropic's commercial terms of service state that customers can't use the service to 'build a competing product or service, including to train competing AI models or reverse engineer or duplicate services.'
Anthropic's commercial terms of service states that customers can't use the service to 'build a competing product or service, including to train competing AI models or reverse engineer or duplicate services.'
This could be a big blow for OpenAI as it prepares to launch GPT-5 — the latest version of the company's technology. While it isn't clear what OpenAI was accessing Claude for, Anthropic has quickly become known for its coding ability.
However, according to Wired's sources, OpenAI was plugging Claude directly into its own internal tools instead of using the regular chat interface. This would have allowed the company to run tests to measure Claude's capabilities against its own model.
This would, in theory, help OpenAI to determine its own model's behaviour and safeguard under similar conditions, giving them a competitive advantage in testing.
'It's industry standard to evaluate other AI systems to benchmark progress and improve safety. While we respect Anthropic's decision to cut off our API access, it's disappointing considering our API remains available to them,' OpenAI's chief communications officer, Hannah Wong, said in a statement to WIRED.
Get instant access to breaking news, the hottest reviews, great deals and helpful tips.
In response, Nutty stated that Anthropic will 'continue to ensure OpenAI has API access for the purposes of benchmarking and safety evaluations as is standard practice across the industry.'
Reports now suggest that GPT-5 could be here any day. Researchers are already in the early stages of testing the technology, and OpenAI has been hinting at a launch in the next week.
With this in mind, OpenAI has likely now done all of its early comparisons against other tools. While this will be a small blow to OpenAI, it is likely to change GPT-5 at all.
AI companies seem to be getting scrappier in recent months. Staff talent is being stolen from each other and, in cases like this, they are getting more private with their technology.
As two of the main AI companies around right now, Anthropic and OpenAI are likely to keep clashing well into the future.
Follow Tom's Guide on Google News to get our up-to-date news, how-tos, and reviews in your feeds. Make sure to click the Follow button.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
24 minutes ago
- Business Insider
I earn up to $20,000 a month by vibe coding products to sell online. It's saving me weeks of time.
Since 2018, I've been creating printables and selling private label rights, or PLR. By adding digital products, templates, and courses, I grew my business into a six-figure income. As an experienced developer and app designer, I've maximized my income by using AI to create digital products. I was making $10,000 a month until I started vibe coding, which enabled me to double my income to up to $20,000 a month. Vibe coding has transformed the way I work I've been developing and designing apps with a focus on user experience for over 25 years, working for major companies such as Verizon and American Airlines. I even dabbled in machine learning and AI long before it became mainstream. I left my last corporate job in 2020. Everything changed when I started using AI to create digital products and apps for my own business. I no longer needed to write every line of code by hand. Instead, I began vibe coding, telling the AI what I wanted to build, and it would generate the code for me in Python. From there, I would tweak it, add features, or adjust anything that didn't meet the mark. Sometimes, I skip coding altogether and use prompt engineering to achieve my desired outcome. I can now create a printable workbook or journal in under 20 minutes Before I started vibe coding, it could've taken me weeks or months to create a single course or printable. Now I can create a printable workbook in under 20 minutes, and I can create a course and an app in under an hour and a half. I use ChatGPT, Midjourney, Ideogram, and Recraft to put everything together and make it look nice enough to sell. I also use Canva, which now has many AI features. This shift has freed me to focus more on the overall design of the finished product, bringing the vision to life without getting bogged down in the technical details. I create digital workbooks using vibe coding in ChatGPT's Python libraries. I even make the workbook fillable, so there's no need to print it out. People can fill out their workbooks in Adobe Acrobat on their computers, and the data is saved for them to refer back to again and again. I've even made fillable contracts and forms using my Fillable PDF Creator GPT tool. I also love creating custom GPTs with Python, including workbooks, journals, e-books, checklists, clip art, seamless patterns, stickers, spreadsheets, and more, to sell. My coding background has enabled me to think outside the box and push the limits of what AI can do Consider a problem people face, and then think for yourself or ask ChatGPT what products you could develop to address it. I first do market research to see what problems people are having in my audience or a similar niche. I did this when I was a user experience designer, and it really helps validate your idea, as you know, there will be demand. From there, I sketch the product idea into a visualization. I then use ChatGPT or another AI to help with the content further. I like to upload my sketch, so it can see what I mean. Once I get the necessary information, I then take it to Canva to create the design. I sell both PLR and personal-use printables created with AI tools. I used to sell things at lower prices, like $27 and $47. I've raised my prices to start at $97 for courses and go up to $997 for comprehensive programs. I sell most of my printables in my Shopify store, for $7 to $37, and I also use Etsy. Thanks to AI, I've expanded my product count to over 1,500. My specialization in AI and UX design has made me an expert in the field of digital products, so I feel confident charging what my products are worth. I ask my community what they want and make it I have an email list with over 170,000 people, so I'll regularly send surveys to gauge their purchasing preferences. Another great idea is to join Facebook groups in your niche and see what people are struggling with. You can think for yourself or ask ChatGPT for product ideas for those struggles. The boho design is super popular, so I've been creating lots of boho clipart, stickers, printable planners, journals, seamless patterns, and coloring pages. The 1970s groovy style is also catching on, but I'm unsure if my audience would appreciate it. Just because something is trending doesn't mean it is right for your audience. I like to use Etsy research tools such as Sale Samurai and E-Rank. I also like using Book Publisher Rocket to find trending books on Amazon. Vibe coding has changed how I see creativity and entrepreneurship It has removed the barrier to entry for creating digital products and apps to sell, even for those with no knowledge of coding or artistic skills. Before, only artists and coders could create digital products to sell. Now, anyone with an imagination and an idea can create virtually anything they want. AI is continually improving and requires less user input. Soon, it will tell you what digital products it wants to create. If anyone is concerned about AI art and coding due to job loss, don't be. I'm a trained artist and majored in fine arts in college. I see it as a tool to further my creativity. If you move along and learn it instead of being against it, you'll increase your job security.
WIRED
24 minutes ago
- WIRED
How Supercomputing Will Evolve, According to Jack Dongarra
Aug 5, 2025 5:00 AM WIRED talked with one of the most influential voices in computer science about the potential for AI and quantum to supercharge supercomputers. Jack Dongarra in Lindau in July 2025. Photograph: Patrick Kunkel/Lindau Nobel Laureate Meetings High-performance supercomputing—once the exclusive domain of scientific research—is now a strategic resource for training increasingly complex artificial intelligence models. This convergence of AI and HPC is redefining not only these technologies, but also the ways in which knowledge is produced, and takes a strategic position in the global landscape. To discuss how HPC is evolving, in July WIRED caught up with Jack Dongarra, a US computer scientist who has been a key contributor to the development of HPC software over the past four decades—so much so that in 2021 he earned the prestigious Turing Award. The meeting took place at the 74th Nobel Laureate Meeting in Lindau, Germany, which brought together dozens of Nobel laureates as well as more than 600 emerging scientists from around the world. This interview has been edited for length and clarity. Jack Dongarra on stage at the 74th Lindau Nobel Laureate Meetings. Photograph: Patrick Kunkel/Lindau Nobel Laureate Meetings WIRED: What will be the role of artificial intelligence and quantum computing in scientific and technological development in the coming years? Jack Dongarra: I would say AI is already playing an important role in how science is done: We're using AI in many ways to help with scientific discovery. It's being used in terms of computing and helping us to approximate how things behave. So I think of AI as a way to get an approximation, and then maybe refine the approximation with the traditional techniques. Today we have traditional techniques for modeling and simulation, and those are run on computers. If you have a very demanding problem, then you would turn to a supercomputer to understand how to compute the solution. AI is going to make that faster, better, more efficient. AI is also going to have an impact beyond science—it's going to be more important than the internet was when it arrived. It's going to be so pervasive in what we do. It's going to be used in so many ways that we haven't really discovered today. It's going to serve more of a purpose than the internet has played in the past 15, 20 years. Quantum computing is interesting. It's really a wonderful area for research, but my feeling is we have a long way to go. Today we have examples of quantum computers—hardware always arrives before software—but those examples are very primitive. With a digital computer, we think of doing a computation and getting an answer. The quantum computer is instead going to give us a probability distribution of where the answer is, and you're going to make a number of, we'll call it runs on the quantum computer, and it'll give you a number of potential solutions to the problem, but it's not going to give you the answer. So it's going to be different. With quantum computing, are we caught in a moment of hype? I think unfortunately it's been oversold—there's too much hype associated with quantum. The result of that typically is that people will get all excited about it, and then it doesn't live up to any of the promises that were made, and then the excitement will collapse. We've seen this before: AI has gone through that cycle and has recovered. And now today AI is a real thing. People use it, it's productive, and it's going to serve a purpose for all of us in a very substantial way. I think quantum has to go through that winter, where people will be discouraged by it, they'll ignore it, and then there'll be some bright people who figure out how to use it and how to make it so that it is more competitive with traditional things. There are many issues that have to be worked out. Quantum computers are very easy to disturb. They're going to have a lot of 'faults'—they will break down because of the nature of how fragile the computation is. Until we can make things more resistant to those failures, it's not going to do quite the job that we hope that it can do. I don't think we'll ever have a laptop that's a quantum laptop. I may be wrong, but certainly I don't think it'll happen in my lifetime. Quantum computers also need quantum algorithms, and today we have very few algorithms that can effectively be run on a quantum computer. So quantum computing is at its infancy, and along with that the infrastructure that will use the quantum computer. So quantum algorithms, quantum software, the techniques that we have, all of those are very primitive. When can we expect—if ever—the transition from traditional to quantum systems? So today we have many supercomputing centers around the world, and they have very powerful computers. Those are digital computers. Sometimes the digital computer gets augmented with something to enhance performance—an accelerator. Today those accelerators are GPUs, graphics processing units. The GPU does something very well, and it just does that thing well, it's been architected to do that. In the old days, that was important for graphics; today we're refactoring that so that we can use a GPU to satisfy some of the computational needs that we have. In the future, I think that we will augment the CPU and the GPU with other devices. Perhaps quantum would be another device that we would add to that. Maybe it would be neuromorphic—computing that sort of imitates how our brain works. And then we have optical computers. So think of shining light and having that light interfere, and the interference basically is the computation you want it to do. Think of an optical computer that takes two beams of light, and in the light is encoded numbers, and when they interact in this computing device, it produces an output, which is the multiplication of those numbers. And that happens at the speed of light. So that's incredibly fast. So that's a device that perhaps could fit into this CPU, GPU, quantum, neuromorphic computer device. Those are all things that perhaps could combine. How is the current geopolitical competition—between China, the United States, and beyond—affecting the development and sharing of technology? The US is restricting computing at a certain level from going to China. Certain parts from Nvidia are no longer allowed to be sold there, for example. But they're sold to areas around China, and when I go visit Chinese colleagues and look at what they have in their their computers, they have a lot of Nvidia stuff. So there's an unofficial pathway. At the same time, China has pivoted from buying Western technology to investing in its own technology, putting more funding into the research necessary to advance it. Perhaps this restriction that's been imposed has backfired by causing China to accelerate the development of parts that they can control very much more than they could otherwise. The Chinese have also decided that information about their supercomputers should not be advertised. We do know about them—what they look like, and what their potential is, and what they've done—but there's no metric that allows us to benchmark and compare in a very controlled way how those computers compare against the machines that we have. They have very powerful machines that are probably equal to the power of the most significant machines that we have in the US. They're built on technology that was invented or designed in China. They've designed their own chips. They compete with the chips that we have in the computers that are in the West. And the question that people ask is: Where were the chips fabricated? Most chips used in the West are fabricated by the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company. China has technology, which is a generation or two behind the technology that TSMC has, but they're going to catch up. My guess is that some of the Chinese chips are also fabricated in Taiwan. When I ask my Chinese friends 'Where were your chips manufactured?' they say China. And if I push them and say 'Well, were they manufactured in Taiwan?' the answer to that comes back eventually is Taiwan is part of China. Jack Dongarra on the shores of Lake Constance at the 74th Nobel Laureate Meeting. Photograph: Gianluca Dotti/Wired How will the role of programmers and developers change as AI evolves? Will we get to write software using only natural language? AI has a very important role I think in helping to take away some of the time-consuming parts of developing programs. It's gotten all the information about everybody else's programs that's available and then it synthesizes that and then can push that forward. I've been very impressed when I have asked some of these systems to write a piece of software to do a certain task; the AI does a pretty good job. And then I can refine that with another prompt, saying 'Optimize this for this kind of computer,' and it does a pretty good job of that. In the future, I think more and more we will be using language to describe a story to AI, and then have it write a program to carry out that function. Now of course, there are limits—and we have to be careful about hallucinations or something giving us the wrong results. But maybe we can build in some checks to verify the solutions that AI produces and we can use that as a way of measuring the potential accuracy of that solution. We should be aware of the potential problems, but I think we have to move ahead in this front. This story originally appeared on WIRED Italia and has been translated from Italian.
Business Insider
an hour ago
- Business Insider
OpenAI offered me a job. Meta reached out just hours after I posted about it.
Meta is making headlines for poaching leading AI researchers and offering some compensation packages that reach into the nine figures. Hiring AI-focused software engineers is becoming intensely competitive across Big Tech and AI startups. This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Yangshun Tay, a 35-year-old AI engineer currently based in Singapore. Tay previously worked for five years at Meta and now runs GreatFrontEnd, a startup that helps software developers improve their skills. I interviewed with OpenAI a while ago, but I only decided to post about their offer on Tuesday. Within the next 12 hours, Meta sent me an email congratulating me on my OpenAI offer and asking if I'd be interested in working with them. What was amusing to me was that I initially thought they didn't know I had previously worked at Meta. But when I replied to their email, they actually noted that they knew about my background there. They knew exactly who I was. I worked at Meta for over five years before leaving to build my own company, GreatFrontEnd, which is a platform for front-end engineers to upskill themselves. We have around 10 people now, though we're not looking to scale it extremely big. We're keeping it running while we explore new ideas and products. Meta isn't leading the AI race I was very surprised that Meta reached out so quickly because I don't actually have a background in AI research. I'm more on the applied engineering side. Even for the OpenAI role, it's for software engineering — building ChatGPT and working with those teams. So I was surprised Meta was also hiring for AI engineering positions. But I'm probably not going back to Meta. I don't think they're leading the AI race right now, even though they've made a lot of high-profile hires. I'm just not too bullish on Meta after working there for over five years. The Meta outreach wasn't really an offer anyway. Since I've been gone for more than two years, I'd have to re-interview if I wanted to join back. The opportunity cost of being an employee is high Being in demand as an AI engineer is great, but it's also a little stressful, and I'm not sure if it's sustainable. To be honest— I'd prefer to build my own things right now - maybe start new AI products or ventures. The opportunity cost of being an employee is quite high because AI is moving so fast. By being an employee and building ideas for somebody else, you're losing out on the opportunity to build a product that could eventually become very big. I think it's great for top talent, but there are a lot of engineers struggling to find jobs, as well. Based on my experience, AI advancement really relies on breakthroughs that come from just a few people. You don't need too many — just a few smart, cream-of-the-crop people to have major breakthroughs and extremely disproportionate impact. That's why Meta is willing to pay so much for top talent. But talent moves around so frequently in the Bay Area between tech companies. Even if Meta has a breakthrough, it's not going to stay within Meta's walls for long. Every big company is building their own AI models now. There's a model arms race going on right now. You see companies beating each other every other day in terms of benchmarks. I think it's overall good for humanity and AI advancement — so Meta is actually doing everyone a favor. AI is changing how teams work Many CEOs are claiming they're replacing their workforce with AI, and those without special skills are definitely more at risk. AI is great at doing stuff that's well-practiced and has been done many times. A lot of work in software engineering falls into this category — there's already a solution, you just need someone to implement it. AI handles that well, which leaves people to focus on what matters more: creativity and innovation. That's where top talent comes in — they're the ones innovating. The hiring environment now is nowhere close to what I experienced during my previous years at Meta. The salaries were great back then, but nowhere near what Meta is paying for AI talent now. I posted to raise my profile After I posted about my OpenAI offer, it wasn't just Meta that reached out. Several other companies, mostly smaller companies I hadn't heard of, sent cold emails. Posting about the offer was more for marketing purposes. My plan was to say I have some offers, but I'm not taking them. It's just to raise my profile and for future projects. I was seriously considering joining OpenAI, but ultimately I think the timing is too good to pass up. Right now is a great time to build and start a company.
