Frontier AI and Model Releases: Conflicting Anthropic safety claims; unverified model availability rumors on Gemini 3.1 Flash and GPT-5.3-cd

Do not act on claims of Gemini 3.1 Flash on Vertex AI or GPT-5.3-codex API availability until verified on official product pages and release notes. Treat the two “Anthropic withdraws security promise” posts as the same unverified claim; they directly conflict.

We assess two clusters: (1) product-release rumors for Google and OpenAI; (2) contradictory safety-policy claims about Anthropic. None of the posts link to primary sources. The Anthropic items [3][5] appear duplicative and conflict with another post [4] asserting the opposite stance. Operationally, hold changes until a

What Changed

Multiple social posts claim: Google’s Gemini 3.1 Flash is live on Vertex AI; OpenAI’s “GPT-5.3-codex” is available via API [1].
Two separate posts claim Anthropic “withdrew” a core security/safety commitment [3][5], while another asserts Anthropic rejected Pentagon pressure and reaffirmed safeguards [4].
A separate post alleges Canadian officials criticized OpenAI after a shooting, citing safety gaps [2].

Observed facts (from provided sources only):

All items are single Mastodon posts with no linked primary documentation [1][2][3][4][5].
Posts [3] and [5] make substantively the same claim about Anthropic’s “withdrawal”; [4] asserts the opposite (reaffirmation under pressure).

Cross-Source Inference

Gemini 3.1 Flash and GPT-5.3-codex availability: Unverified. Single-source rumor without official docs or pricing/API references. Given the magnitude of such launches, absence of corroborating company blogs or docs suggests the claims are premature or speculative (confidence: medium) [1].
Anthropic policy direction: Posts [3] and [5] are likely duplicates of the same claim; post [4] provides a directly contradictory narrative. With no primary source, net signal is conflict, not confirmation. Therefore, there is no reliable evidence of either a formal withdrawal of safety commitments or an official reaffirmation tied to Pentagon pressure at this time (confidence: medium). The coexistence of opposing claims implies active rumor propagation about Anthropic’s policy posture (confidence: high) [3][4][5].
OpenAI criticism tied to a Canadian shooting: The single post offers a serious allegation without primary references. Treat as unverified and not actionable until supported by official statements or major outlets (confidence: medium-low) [2].

Implications and What to Watch

Immediate operational posture:

Do not update service catalogs or enable customer migration paths for Gemini 3.1 Flash or GPT-5.3-codex until appearance on official product pages, changelogs, or API dashboards (Google Cloud release notes; OpenAI API docs) [1].
Avoid revising Anthropic risk profiles or safety-control assumptions based on [3]/[5]; monitor for an official Anthropic blog/policy update or press statement. Use existing, previously verified Responsible Use and safety-rails assumptions until contradicted by primary sources [3][4][5].

Verification triggers to track (actionable):

Google: Vertex AI model catalog, Google Cloud release notes, and Gemini blog posts referencing “Gemini 3.1 Flash,” including pricing/regions and API method names [1].
OpenAI: API model index, release notes, or blog announcing “GPT-5.3-codex,” including access tiering and deprecation notices for older code models [1].
Anthropic: Official policy page, blog, or press comment clarifying any change or reaffirmation of safety commitments; credible journalism corroborating DoD-related pressure or policy correspondence [3][4][5].
OpenAI–Canada item: Government statements, law-enforcement briefings, or major media confirming safety-policy critiques tied to the incident [2].

Risk outlook (contingent on verification):

If Gemini 3.1 Flash and GPT-5.3-codex are confirmed: potential shifts in developer adoption and safety-surface changes due to new capabilities and rate limits; reassess misuse exposure once specs and guardrails are known (confidence: low until verified) [1].
If Anthropic policy withdrawal is confirmed: elevated misuse risk and governance uncertainty; if reaffirmation is confirmed instead, status quo with potential regulatory friction narratives (confidence: low until verified) [3][4][5].

PushMe Intelligence