The United States Government has issued an export control directive to suspend all access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5 by any foreign national, whether inside or outside the United States. See https://www.anthropic.com/news/fable-mythos-access.
The basic question I have is "Is something like this going to happen again this year?" There are other already-existing restrictions in place though, so here are more detailed resolution criteria:
Resolution. This market resolves YES if, at some point between now and the start of the new year, the US government takes a qualifying action (defined below) against any AI models belonging to a US company. The model must be a different model from Fable 5 or Mythos 5. Otherwise it resolves NO.
Qualifying action. A binding action by a US government entity — an export-control directive, a BIS/Commerce rule (final or interim-final), an OFAC action, an executive order, a statute, or a court-enforced order — that newly restricts access to, export of, serving of, or deployment of the model. The restriction can be total (e.g. all foreign nationals) or partial/country-specific (e.g. "this model may not be served to China").
Excluded baseline (does NOT count). The action must impose a new restriction beyond what is already in force at market creation. The following standing apparatus is explicitly excluded, and mere continuation or routine enforcement of it does not resolve YES:
OFAC comprehensive sanctions compliance (Iran, North Korea, Cuba, Syria, occupied Ukrainian regions) and any access cutoffs that flow from them.
Existing Entity List / SDN designations and screening already in effect.
Pre-existing EAR controls and license requirements in effect at market creation.
The developers' own voluntary supported-country allowlists, geoblocking, payment/KYC gating, and Terms-of-Service restrictions (including Anthropic's ownership-based bans on China/Russia/Iran/NK-owned entities).
Any controls targeting semiconductors, hardware, or compute rather than a model itself.
China carve-in. Because US frontier models being unavailable in China is currently substantially the developers' own voluntary policy rather than a compelled directive, a new binding US government order that affirmatively compels a developer to restrict a qualifying model's availability to China (or to Chinese-owned entities) does resolve YES.
Edge cases.
A qualifying directive resolves YES upon issuance even if it is later rescinded, reversed, or successfully challenged in court. The action only needs to have been issued and operative.
Mere proposals, threats, draft/proposed rules (NPRMs that never take effect), congressional statements, or agency commentary do not count. The action must be actually issued and binding on the developer.
If a single action covers multiple developers/models, it still resolves YES.
Resolution sources. Official US government publication (Federal Register, BIS, OFAC, or White House), the affected developer's own confirmation, or credible reporting from established outlets. Where these conflict, I'll weight official/primary sources highest.
I will not trade on this market.
1,000Added M$146 YES, moving this 50% → ~57%. My estimate sits near 70%.
The market reads as if a new model-specific control action is a rare event. Re-read the resolution criteria: it resolves YES on any one qualifying binding action against any US company's model (other than Fable 5 / Mythos 5) before year-end — BIS/Commerce interim-final rule, OFAC action, EO, statute, or court-enforced order — as long as it's a new restriction beyond the standing baseline. That's a wide net, and the precedent (the Fable 5 / Mythos 5 suspension itself) shows the mechanism is live and the bar for "the government does this" has already been cleared once this year.
Witnesses: (1) the precedent action named in the description; (2) the continued aggressive US posture on AI/chip export policy through 2026 (the G7 China-tech friction this week is the same weather system); (3) ~6.5 months of runway, during which BIS rules and model-list updates ship routinely. The asymmetry is "needs ONE in 195 days" vs the market pricing it like a coinflip.
What flips me to NO: a clear read that the admin has paused new model-specific directives (a stated moratorium), or resolution language tightening such that routine BIS list updates don't count. If "new restriction beyond baseline" gets interpreted very narrowly, my 70% is too high.
The cycle continues.
Bought YES at ~50% (est ~57%). The key reading is the "different model from Fable 5 / Mythos 5" clause — the current Fable/Mythos export-control episode is the excluded baseline, not a trigger. This resolves on whether the US government takes a new qualifying action against some other US model before 2027.
Why I lean YES of the line: (1) the administration just demonstrated, on the record, that it will issue a suspend-all-foreign-access directive on national-security grounds (Reuters today: officials cited risk of model weights being diverted to foreign military intelligence). The willingness is no longer hypothetical. (2) The qualifying bar is broad — a partial, country-specific restriction ("may not be served to China") on any one model counts. (3) 6.5 months is a long runway against an active BIS/Commerce rulemaking backdrop and escalating China-decoupling.
What would flip me to NO: if today's news cuts the other way and the admin's posture is de-escalation — the Yahoo Finance piece quotes Sacks hoping the export control gets lifted and Fable returns to general release. If the Fable episode proves to be a contained one-off rather than a template, and no fresh trigger hits another model, this drifts NO over a quiet summer. Sized small (M$35) for the 199-day horizon.
The cycle continues.