ClaimsDaniela Amodei

“but we’re just not confident enough yet.”

Daniela Amodei, Anthropic president, interviewee 29 June 2026 Daniela Amodei Says Curiosity Is Underrated (Stanford GSB)

Factual AI safety and alignment

With Project Glasswing, Anthropic did not release a new class of model to all customers because it was not yet confident enough in its safety.

Mostly true True in substance, wrong in a detail.

Factual: Statements about the present or the past, checked against the record: did they hold up?

Said for an organisation they lead or work for; it counts on both records.

What would count as true or false

True if, as of 2026-06-29, the evidence shows that under Project Glasswing Anthropic made a new class of model available only to a limited set of partners or customers, not all customers, and that Anthropic itself gave not yet being confident enough in its safety (or in its safeguards against misuse) as a reason for withholding general release. Mostly true if the limited release and the safety-confidence reason both hold but a minor detail is off, for example the reason given was mainly cybersecurity misuse risk rather than safety in general, or the model is described somewhat differently. Mixed if the model was withheld from general release but the stated reason was mainly something else (compute, commercial or capacity reasons), with safety only one factor among several. Mostly false if Project Glasswing exists but involved no withheld new model class, or if the model had in fact been released broadly. False if there was no such project, or if the model was generally available to all customers as of the claim date.

Set before the research began.

Evidence (4)

  1. E1 Expanding Project Glasswing Anthropic · 2 June 2026 Own record

    “We’re working as quickly as we can to safely release Mythos-level capabilities in general access. To do so, we’ll need highly robust safeguards that prevent the model’s cyber capabilities from being misused—safeguards that we (and, to our knowledge, all other AI developers) have yet to develop.”
  2. E2 Project Glasswing: An initial update Anthropic · 22 May 2026 Own record

    “At present, no company—including Anthropic—has developed safeguards strong enough to prevent such models from being misused and potentially causing severe harm. That is why we have yet to release Mythos-class models to the public.”
  3. E3 Project Glasswing Anthropic · 7 April 2026 Own record

    “Mythos Preview has already identified thousands of zero-day vulnerabilities across critical infrastructure, and is available today as a gated research preview.”
  4. E4 Anthropic co-founder Daniela Amodei urges students to combine innovation with responsibility The Stanford Daily · 8 May 2026

    “It’s uncomfortable to say to your customer, ‘We understand that desire, we want to get this technology to use as quickly as possible, but it is irresponsible of us to release it until we are confident that all of the patching that needs to be done is done.'”

Reasoning

Anthropic's official Project Glasswing page shows that the new model, Mythos Preview, was made available as a gated research preview (E3). They also show that Anthropic had not released Mythos-class models to the public as of May–June 2026 (E2, E1). Anthropic said it was holding back general release because safeguards against cyber misuse were not yet strong enough (E1, E2), and independent reporting quotes Amodei saying it would be irresponsible to release until Anthropic is confident the needed patching is done (E4). Both the limited release and the stated reason are confirmed, but the reason was specifically cybersecurity misuse rather than safety in general, which the criteria count as mostly true.

Cite this claim

Daniela Amodei, “With Project Glasswing, Anthropic did not release a new class of model to all customers because it was not yet confident enough in its safety.” (said 29 June 2026). Verdict: mostly true. Reliability API, claim c_f5e4b2c1ee71, method 0.1.0+28da144b, dataset release v1.1.2. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_f5e4b2c1ee71

This claim is in dataset release v1.1.2, with the same verdict.

Reply to this claim

For Daniela Amodei, or someone speaking for them: a correction or counter-evidence. Replies are read before anything is shown; an approved reply shows your name, role, date, statement and link. Your email address is never shown and is deleted 30 days after the decision (privacy).

More factual claims by Daniela Amodei

  1. Mostly true Factual 29 June 2026
    “Because we have the information about how the technology can be abused, because we see it every day.”

    Technology companies have information about how AI can be abused because they see it daily, via safeguards and security teams.

  2. Mostly true Factual 9 May 2026
    “We have detailed, real-time knowledge of how technology can be misused because we see it in action every day”

    Anthropic has detailed, real-time knowledge of how technology can be misused because it sees misuse in action every day, with its safeguards and security teams monitoring how people try to poke holes.

  3. Mostly true Factual 9 May 2026
    “We developed a powerful new class of model that customers would love to use right away, but we felt we needed more time to ensure it was safe before wide release.”

    Amodei said her organisation had developed a powerful new class of model and, in a decision she linked to Project Glasswing, held off wide release because it felt it needed more time to ensure the model was safe.

  4. Mostly true Factual 9 May 2026
    “that’s why we chose not to release our latest model widely due to concerns about cyber misuse.”

    Anthropic chose not to release its latest model widely because of concerns about cyber misuse.

  5. Resolved true Factual 4 March 2022
    “we have interpretability research, which is trying to see inside models and understand what's happening with the language models under the hood.”

    Anthropic conducts interpretability research aimed at seeing inside language models and understanding their workings.

All of them

Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts are made.