Skip to main content
Axios

Axios

Newspaper | United States | Centre
www.axios.com/

Smart brevity news covering politics, business, technology, and more. Get essential news efficiently.

Engagement Insights

3.41 score
113
Discussions
6
Participants
12
Total Votes
474
Articles

Discussions from Axios

Technology

How should the government balance AI development with national security concerns?

A senior Trump administration official and key adviser are slamming OpenAI head of strategic futures Dean Ball's views on regulation, casting a shadow on the future of the company's relationship with the government. Why it matters: The criticism targets a former White House architect of the administration's AI Action Plan who now works at OpenAI, potentially complicating the company's relationship with the Trump administration. State of play: The Trump administration is grappling with how to balance competition and cybersecurity concerns as increasingly capable Chinese AI models come onto the scene. Ball said the Trump administration would eventually land on creating regulatory risk around using Chinese models as "their best strategy." That prompted outside White House AI adviser David Sacks to question whether Ball was advocating for regulatory capture — a scenario that would benefit Ball's new employer OpenAI. Ball in another X post over the weekend clarified he was not proposing "ill-justified soft-law discouragement of Chinese AI" as a good idea. Zoom in: "Every industry/ecosystem has its supreme village idiot. @deanwball is that for AI," Defense under secretary Emil Michael said Sunday on X. "Dean Ball has perhaps the biggest gap between actual IQ and his own perceived IQ of anyone in the industry (about 40 points)."Michael was arguing against Ball's point that various government agencies, including the Pentagon, have blocked employees from using Chinese AI, which has already sent a message to regulated companies.That happened through a "democratic process," Michael said, "not some Deep State scheme." What we're watching: The Pentagon has not shied away from going ad hominem as seen in a fight with Anthropic earlier this year. The relationship quickly deteriorated: Anthropic was deemed a national security risk and had to take the government to court. The spat between Ball and key Trump officials could translate to larger scrutiny of OpenAI.Ball, the Pentagon an

United States
Join Discussion
Politics

How should media companies balance freedom of speech with their responsibilities to the public?

President Trump threatened again to revoke the broadcast licenses of ABC and NBC on Thursday, after those networks decided not to preempt their regularly scheduled programming to cover his address on election integrity live. Why it matters: The Federal Communications Commission has already launched probes into broadcasters, alleging their practices violate public interest standards. Those efforts could have serious business consequences. "In a rare move, NBC and ABC fake news have both said that they would not cover this speech. They knew what it was about," he said. "Fraud like this should mean a revocation of their licenses."The official White House rapid response X account also slammed CNN for not carrying the address live. State of play: CBS and Fox were the only major broadcasters to preempt their regularly scheduled primetime programming for President Trump's speech. Fox and Fox News Channel both aired the entire speech in real-time. CBS aired portions of the address live as part of a special news broadcast.MS NOW didn't take the full speech live, but also covered some clips in real-time as part of its regularly scheduled news programming.ABC, NBC and CNN did not take the program live on linear television, but ABC and NBC aired coverage of the speech on their streaming channels. Between the lines: The subject of the speech likely pushed the networks to exert caution. In his address, the president claimed the Chinese government tried to undermine the 2020 election. Networks have been cautious about airing unverified claims by the president and others on the validity of the 2020 election, especially following Fox News' $787 million defamation settlement that it paid for airing election lies. The big picture: The Trump administration has increased pressure on broadcast networks through a series of FCC investigations and regulatory probes led by chairman Brendan Carr, a Trump ally. Carr has opened an investigation into ABC's "The View" over questions surrounding i

United States
Join Discussion
Geopolitics

How should European leaders respond to Zelensky's concerns about their actions in the ongoing conflict?

DAVOS, Switzerland — Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky began his address at Davos on Thursday with a stinging rebuke for European leaders over their reluctance to use hard power to punish Russia or defend the continent. Why it matters: European countries often see themselves as keeping Ukraine afloat while President Trump pulls back. But Zelensky made clear he thinks the Europeans are too risk-averse and slow to react — and that the wake-up call Trump has given the continent was long overdue. "If Europe is not seen as a global force, if its actions do not scare bad actors, Europe will always be reacting, catching up to new, dangerous attacks," he said.Zelensky called on the European leaders to use frozen Russian assets and take bold steps like seizing Russian tankers, as Trump has done over Venezuela. Driving the news: Zelensky made news in the Q&A portion following his speech, announcing U.S., Ukrainian and Russian officials will hold trilateral talks in Abu Dhabi on Friday and Saturday. His remarks came shortly after an hourlong meeting with President Trump.Trump's envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner are heading to Moscow for a meeting with Putin, who has signaled no desire for a truce any time soon. State of play: The U.S. is close to agreement with Ukraine on the terms of a peace plan. While Putin hasn't outright rejected it, his public comments have been unenthusiastic. Meanwhile, Russia has been pummeling Ukraine's energy infrastructure at a time of brutal winter conditions. What he's saying: Zelensky said "every European leader" is currently wondering whether the U.S. would help them in the event of a conflict. "Europe must learn how to defend itself. Sending 14 or 40 soldiers to Greenland, what is that meant to achieve? What message does that send to Putin? To China? And perhaps most importantly, what message does it send to Denmark?""Europe looks lost trying to convince the U.S. president to change. But he will not change. President Trump loves who

Global
Join Discussion
Geopolitics

How might Lindsey Graham's death change US foreign policy and the GOP's approach to international issues?

The death of Senator Lindsey Graham leaves key US allies like Ukraine, which have at times struggled to influence the Trump administration, without one of their most effective conduits to the White House. Rebeccah Heinrichs, senior fellow at Hudson Institute, joined Balance of Power and said there's momentum for Congress to pass a Russia sanctions bill that had been championed by Senator Lindsey Graham. (Source: Bloomberg)

United States
Join Discussion
Technology

What could be the benefits and challenges of having a global AI watchdog led by the U.S.?

Demis Hassabis, Google DeepMind co-founder and CEO, is calling on the U.S. to establish a new AI watchdog with the power to screen the world's most advanced models — and coordinate an industry-wide slowdown if dangers mount. Hassabis, the Nobel laureate behind Gemini, lays out the plan in a personal manifesto published Tuesday morning, "A Framework for Frontier AI and the Dawning of a New Age." Why it matters: In an exclusive interview with Axios, Hassabis said the time has come for a more "systematic" approach to AI regulation — funded by the industry, staffed by world-class technical experts, and answerable to the U.S. government. Today's AI-driven cyber risks are "warning shots," Hassabis told us from his London base. Within 18 months, he said, those capabilities — plus far graver biological and nuclear threats — could live inside open-source models beyond any government's control. Hassabis emphasized to us that risks will come from the major labs' more powerful future proprietary models, not just open-source models."What we collectively do now," he writes in his manifesto, "will determine how the next phase of civilization unfolds." Behind the scenes: Hassabis has spent months quietly building support for the plan, briefing the Trump administration, fellow lab leaders and European officials before going public. "The noises I've been hearing are very positive," he said of his talks with the administration, which had embraced a laissez-faire approach to AI regulation prior to the Mythos scare.Hassabis, a scientist who commands rare respect across AI's warring camps, says the other major lab leaders agree at a high level: "This is where the industry needs to go."His timeline is aggressive. "Months," Hassabis said, ideally with the new body operational "before year-end." How it works: Hassabis is proposing an AI standards body modeled on FINRA (Financial Industry Regulatory Authority), the private, industry-funded watchdog that polices Wall Street under SEC oversigh

United States
Join Discussion
Technology

How should the government balance safety concerns with the development of new technology like AI?

The Trump administration has asked OpenAI to limit the release of its next model, GPT-5.6, to only a small set of government-approved partners before any wider release, citing security concerns, according to a source familiar with the matter. Why it matters: This marks the first time the U.S. government has preemptively asked an American AI company to restrict the launch of a model before release. Driving the news: The White House's Office of the National Cyber Director and the Office of Science and Technology Policy asked OpenAI to limit the rollout of GPT-5.6 as the administration builds a framework for testing and evaluating the security of new models, per the source. The Information reported earlier Thursday that OpenAI CEO Sam Altman shared the plans for a limited rollout in a memo to employees. "We've made clear to the U.S. government that this is not our preferred long term model, and will work with them and others in industry to achieve a more sustainable approach for future releases," Altman said in the memo, according to The Information. Between the lines: The source told Axios that OpenAI has been proactively working with the administration on the model release since before Anthropic revoked access to its frontier models, Fable 5 and Mythos 5, over a rare Commerce Department directive. The White House has been looped in on the capabilities of OpenAI's new model and has been able to preview its abilities. Behind the scenes: Altman discussed GPT-5.6 with Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick on Wednesday, Axios has learned. Lutnick wanted to be sure all relevant parts of the government have tested and approved the model, a source familiar with the situation told us. The source said the government intervened because GPT-5.6 has "Mythos-like" capability, not because the administration is suddenly taking a heavier hand."This is what's happening with models of that caliber," the source said. The models are so powerful that the administration wants to be sure the co

United States
Join Discussion
Geopolitics

How does the global perception of America affect our country's relationships and policies with other nations?

Data: Pew Research Center; Chart: Danielle Alberti/Axios The U.S. is losing standing abroad as President Trump's foreign policy fuels doubts about whether America can still be counted on, according to new polling. Why it matters: The Pew Research Center findings capture how Trump's second-term approach is reshaping America's image, with allies and partners increasingly viewing Washington as unreliable, self-interested and less committed to global cooperation. By the numbers: Seventy-six percent of people in 36 countries have no confidence in Trump, while 23% trust his leadership, according to the survey released Tuesday. About 57% of respondents view the U.S. unfavorably, compared with 37% who view it positively.Around 50% say the U.S. is an unreliable partner, compared with 47% who say it is reliable.Only 32% believe the U.S. considers other countries' interests compared to 66% who disagree. The big picture: Trump has taken an aggressive approach toward global organizations such as the United Nations, calling it ineffective. He withdrew the U.S. from several U.N. commitments, reduced funding contributions and repeatedly criticized its leadership. Some world leaders viewed his decision to convene more than two dozen countries for the inaugural summit of his Board of Peace in February as an attempt to undermine the U.N.NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte is in Washington, D.C., this week to meet with Trump and reaffirm the alliance's relationship with the U.S. The partnership has been strained as Trump threatens to withdraw from NATO, which would need congressional approval.The White House didn't respond to Axios' request for comment. Zoom in: Perceptions of U.S. reliability declined sharply among traditional allies since Pew last asked the question in 2022 under President Biden's administration. About 83% of Canadians described the U.S. as a reliable partner in 2022, compared with 35% today. U.S. standing in Sweden, the Netherlands and Germany likewise plummeted by 40

Global
Join Discussion
Healthcare

What should be done to address rising health insurance costs and improve enrollment in the Affordable Care Act?

The cost of Obamacare coverage is due to rise by a median of 14% next year, according to a new analysis, marking further turmoil for the law's marketplaces. Why it matters: It would mark the second straight year of double-digit premium increases in the individual market. Customers could be on the hook for thousands of more dollars in costs, worsening the health affordability crisis. The big picture: Insurers blame the hikes on rising costs of health care services and the expiration of enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies, per the KFF analysis of 77 health plans' preliminary rate filings in 16 states and the District of Columbia. Some enrollees will get subsidies that would cushion the blow, but those who make more than 400% of the federal poverty level, or about $64,000 for a single person, won't qualify.Higher premiums also drive up the government's cost of subsidizing coverage for poorer individuals in the marketplace. Zoom in: The higher out-of-pocket costs are motivating some healthier enrollees, who are more price sensitive, to drop their coverage. That, in turn, makes the overall pool of enrollees sicker and more expensive to care for, causing an increase in overall premiums. Insurers estimate that the sicker risk pool drove premiums up by roughly four percentage points this year and expect a similar increase in 2027.While costs rise, the market is shrinking: Affordable Care Act enrollment already is down by about 3 million people year over year, to 19.2 million, according to federal data released last month. What they're saying: "When you see a decline in enrollment coupled with such a big spike in premiums, neither of those are exactly comforting signs," said Emma Wager, a senior policy analyst for KFF's Program on the ACA. Still, she added, "for now the market is holding strong" overall. The total of 19 million enrollees is still more than any year before 2024. Democrats are seizing on the enrollee drop-off as a campaign issue and blaming Republicans for

United States
Join Discussion