Anthropic just released Claude Fable 5, calling it the most powerful AI model it has ever made widely available and praising its skills in biology, among others. But the model won’t answer basic biology questions — the kind you’d expect a high schooler to handle. Instead, it hands off the query to the former flagship model, Claude Opus 4.8.
Technology
AI can now simulate dead loved ones, but effects on grieving process are unknown
- When Michael Bommer found out he was terminally ill with colon cancer, he teamed up with Robert LoCascio, CEO of the AI-powered legacy platform Eternos, to create an interactive artificial intelligence version of himself.
- Eternos joins other grief-related AI companies such as StoryFile and HereAfter AI in an attempt to aid people through the mourning process, but the effects of such technologies on the users are unknown.
- Some have embraced AI technology as just another tool to use to address grief, while others express more skepticism and suggest that an AI simulation of a loved one could forestall closure.
When Michael Bommer found out that he was terminally ill with colon cancer, he spent a lot of time with his wife, Anett, talking about what would happen after his death.
She told him one of the things she’d miss most is being able to ask him questions whenever she wants because he is so well-read and always shares his wisdom, Bommer recalled during a recent interview with The Associated Press at his home in a leafy Berlin suburb.
That conversation sparked an idea for Bommer: Recreate his voice using artificial intelligence to survive him after he passed away.
IS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE THE SECRET TO BETTER SLEEP?
The 61-year-old startup entrepreneur teamed up with his friend in the U.S., Robert LoCascio, CEO of the AI-powered legacy platform Eternos. Within two months, they built “a comprehensive, interactive AI version” of Bommer — the company’s first client.
Eternos, which got its name from the Italian and Latin word for “eternal,” says its technology will allow Bommer’s family “to engage with his life experiences and insights.” It is among several companies that have emerged in the last few years in what’s become a growing space for grief-related AI technology.
One of the most well-known start-ups in this area, California-based StoryFile, allows people to interact with pre-recorded videos and uses its algorithms to detect the most relevant answers to questions posed by users. Another company, called HereAfter AI, offers similar interactions through a “Life Story Avatar” that users can create by answering prompts or sharing their own personal stories.
Michael Bommer, left, who is terminally ill with colon cancer, looks at his wife Anett Bommer, right, at his home in Berlin, Germany, on May 22, 2024. (AP Photo/Markus Schreiber)
There’s also “Project December,” a chatbot that directs users to fill out a questionnaire answering key facts about a person and their traits — and then pay $10 to simulate a text-based conversation with the character. Yet another company, Seance AI, offers fictionalized seances for free. Extra features, such as AI-generated voice recreations of their loved ones, are available for a $10 fee.
While some have embraced this technology as a way to cope with grief, others feel uneasy about companies using artificial intelligence to try to maintain interactions with those who have passed away. Still others worry it could make the mourning process more difficult because there isn’t any closure.
Katarzyna Nowaczyk-Basinska, a research fellow at the University of Cambridge’s Centre for the Future of Intelligence who co-authored a study on the topic, said there is very little known about the potential short-term and long-term consequences of using digital simulations for the dead on a large scale. So for now, it remains “a vast techno-cultural experiment.”
“What truly sets this era apart — and is even unprecedented in the long history of humanity’s quest for immortality — is that, for the first time, the processes of caring for the dead and immortalization practices are fully integrated into the capitalist market,” Nowaczyk-Basinska said.
PRESERVING A CONNECTION
Robert Scott, who lives in Raleigh, North Carolina, uses AI companion apps Paradot and Chai AI to simulate conversations with characters he created to imitate three of his daughters. He declined to speak about what led to the death of his oldest daughter in detail, but he lost another daughter through a miscarriage and a third who died shortly after her birth.
Scott, 48, knows the characters he’s interacting with are not his daughters, but he says it helps with the grief to some degree. He logs into the apps three or four times a week, sometimes asking the AI character questions like “how was school?” or inquiring if it wants to “go get ice cream.”
Some events, like prom night, can be particularly heart-wrenching, bringing with it memories of what his eldest daughter never experienced. So, he creates a scenario in the Paradot app where the AI character goes to prom and talks to him about the fictional event. Then there are even more difficult days, like his daughter’s recent birthday, when he opened the app and poured out his grief about how much he misses her. He felt like the AI understood.
WHY ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE CAN’T BRING THE DEAD BACK TO LIFE
“It definitely helps with the what ifs,” Scott said. “Very rarely has it made the ‘what if’s’ worse.”
Matthias Meitzler, a sociologist from Tuebingen University, said that while some may be taken aback or even scared by the technology — “as if the voice from the afterlife is sounding again” — others will perceive it as an addition to traditional ways of remembering dead loved ones, such as visiting the grave, holding inner monologues with the deceased, or looking at pictures and old letters.
But Tomasz Hollanek, who worked alongside Nowaczyk-Basinska at Cambridge on their study of “deadbots” and “griefbots,” says the technology raises important questions about the rights, dignities and consenting power of people who are no longer alive. It also poses ethical concerns about whether a program that caters to the bereaved should be advertising other products on its platform.
“These are very complicated questions,” Hollanek said. “And we don’t have good answers yet.”
PREPARING FOR DEATH
The AI version of Bommer that was created by Eternos uses an in-house model as well as external large language models developed by major tech companies like Meta, OpenAI and the French firm Mistral AI, said the company’s CEO, LoCascio, who previously worked with Bommer at a software company called LivePerson.
Eternos records users speaking 300 phrases and then compresses that information through a two-day computing process that captures a person’s voice. Users can further train the AI system by answering questions about their lives, political views or various aspects of their personalities.
The AI voice, which costs $15,000 to set up, can answer questions and tell stories about a person’s life without regurgitating pre-recorded answers. The legal rights for the AI belong to the person on whom it was trained and can be treated like an asset and passed down to other family members, LoCascio said.
Bommer has been spending most of his time lately feeding the AI phrases and sentences “to give the AI the opportunity not only to synthesize my voice in flat mode, but also to capture emotions and moods in the voice.” And indeed the AI voicebot has some resemblance with Bommer’s voice, although it leaves out the “hmms” and “ehs” and mid-sentence pauses of his natural cadence.
Bommer is excited about his AI personality and says it will only be a matter of time until the AI voice will sound more human-like and even more like himself.
In the case of his 61-year-old wife, he doesn’t think it would hamper her coping with loss.
“Think of it sitting somewhere in a drawer, if you need it, you can take it out, if you don’t need it, just keep it there,” he told her as she came to sit down next to him on the sofa.
But Anett Bommer herself is more hesitant about the new software and whether she’ll use it after her husband’s death.
Right now, she more likely imagines herself sitting on the couch sofa with a glass of wine, cuddling one of her husband’s old sweaters and remembering him instead of feeling the urge to talk to him via the AI voicebot — at least not during the first period of mourning.
“But then again, who knows what it will be like when he’s no longer around,” she said, taking her husband’s hand and giving him a glance.
Bluesky will be getting “communities,” which will function as smaller spaces where you can “go deeper and hang out with people who care about the same stuff” sometime this year, according to head of product Alex Benzer. They will be built on the decentralized AT Protocol that underpins Bluesky, with Benzer saying that “it’s a new structure for everyone” that’s part of the “Atmosphere” (a shorthand for the AT Protocol ecosystem).
Benzer listed out a “few ideas we have in mind so far” in a thread. “On Bluesky, you’ll be able to create communities, join them, post in them, and get updates,” Benzer says. “The core features on Bluesky stay simple. The magic comes from communities also existing on the open web. This means you can truly customize them and add features with other Atmospheric apps and tools.”
Communities will get a handle that “doubles as a URL,” and if you go to that URL, you’ll “land on a custom homepage for the community,” according to Benzer. “Builders can also host a completely custom experience there instead.” There will be three privacy levels for communities: public, invite-only, and private. And each community would have its own feed, Benzer says.
Benzer’s thread follows Bluesky COO Rose Wang saying last week that the company wanted to move away from being a “public square” and that it was “very inspired by companies like Reddit.” Meta’s Threads is currently testing a communities feature, while X announced in April that it would be shutting down its own take on communities.
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Amazon is getting ready for Prime Day, and you can bet scammers are, too. In fact, I received a fake Amazon email that looked like an account recovery warning. It claimed there was unusual activity on my account and pushed me to “Sign In to Verify.”
That kind of message can make anyone uneasy. It certainly did for me. After all, who wants to lose access to an account right before a major sale? Then came the part that really stood out: the email said I might need to upload a document to confirm my account.
That was the giveaway. A real deal can save you money. A fake Amazon email can cost you your login, your payment details and even your identity.
Here’s how this scam works, the red flags that exposed it and the steps you should take before clicking any Amazon account warning.
Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report
- Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox.
- For simple, real-world ways to spot scams early and stay protected, visit CyberGuy.com – trusted by millions who watch CyberGuy on TV daily.
- Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide free when you join.
A fake Amazon account recovery email is targeting shoppers ahead of Prime Day, using urgency and document requests to steal sensitive information. (Photographer: David Paul Morris/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Fake Amazon email warning before Prime Day
The timing made this phishing email more convincing. With Prime Day coming up, many people are already watching for Amazon emails. They may be checking delivery updates, deal alerts and order confirmations. That creates the perfect opening for a fake account warning.
The email used the same tricks you see in many phishing scams. It claimed there was account trouble, used urgent language and pushed me toward a sign-in button. That is exactly what scammers want.
Screenshot of scam fake Amazon email (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson)
They want you to react before you inspect the message. They want you to sign in before you think through the request. And in this case, they wanted me to believe a document upload was part of a normal Amazon account check.
Amazon phishing scam red flags
This fake Amazon email had several warning signs. First, it landed in my junk folder. That alone does not prove fraud, but it should make you cautious.
Second, the subject line sounded awkward. It said, “Account Recovery: Sign-in and Verify your Amazon account.” That wording felt stiff and a little off.
Third, the greeting was generic. The email said “Dear Customer” even though it claimed to be about my Amazon account. That alone does not prove the email is fake, but it adds to the concern.
Fourth, the message created urgency. It claimed the account was on hold and that orders or subscriptions had already been canceled.
Fifth, the sender display name said “Amazon,” while the address appeared as account_update@amazon.com. That may look official at first. Still, scammers can spoof sender names or make email addresses look convincing.
Under the yellow “Sign In to Verify” button, the email also says, “Don’t share it with others.” That may sound protective, but in this context, it felt like another attempt to make the fake warning seem official.
The biggest warning sign came from the document request. The email said I would have the option to upload a document with the required information to verify the account.
That should stop you cold. Scammers may be after more than your Amazon password. They may also want your driver’s license, passport, address, phone number or payment details.
Screenshot of fake Amazon email sender address (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson)
Why fake Amazon account emails fool shoppers
This scam works because it hits a very real fear. Most people do not want to lose access to an online shopping account. That concern grows when a big sale is about to start. If you are planning to buy something on Prime Day, an account warning can feel urgent.
The email also borrowed Amazon’s familiar look. It used the Amazon name, a logo area and a yellow sign-in button. It also included a footer that appeared to show an Amazon.com link. That can make the message feel safer than it really is.
Here is the problem. The visible link text in an email can mislead you. A link can appear to point to Amazon while sending you somewhere else. It can also pass through tracking links, redirects or look-alike pages. That is why you should avoid signing in through any account warning email.
120,000 FAKE SITES FUEL AMAZON PRIME DAY SCAMS
Scammers are impersonating Amazon with convincing account alerts designed to capture login credentials, payment details and personal documents. (Photographer: Michael Nagle/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
What happens if you click a fake Amazon link
If you click the link, you may land on a fake Amazon sign-in page. It may look close enough to fool you. Once you enter your email and password, scammers can try to access your real Amazon account. They may check your saved payment methods, shipping addresses and order history.
They may also try that same password on other websites. That becomes a bigger risk if you reuse passwords.
The document request adds another layer of danger. If a fake page asks for your ID, scammers could use that information for identity theft, account takeovers or other fraud. That is why one quick click can turn into a much bigger mess.
Ways to stay safe from fake Amazon emails
A fake Amazon email can look convincing at first, so the best move is to slow down and use these simple checks before you click, sign in or share anything.
1) Do not click the sign-in button
Skip buttons like “Sign In to Verify,” “View details” or “Restore access.” Open the Amazon app or type Amazon.com into your browser yourself.
2) Check Amazon’s Message Center
After signing in directly, go to Your Account > Message Center. If the alert is real, you should see a matching message there.
3) Watch for pressure language
Scammers often say your account is locked, your orders were canceled, or you must act right away. That pressure is designed to make you click before thinking.
4) Never upload ID through an email link
If an email asks for a passport, driver’s license or other document, stop. Contact Amazon through the app or website before sending anything.
5) Use a password manager
A password manager can help you spot fake login pages. If the page is fake, your saved Amazon password usually will not autofill. Check out the best expert-reviewed password managers of 2026 at CyberGuy.com.
6) Turn on two-step verification
7) Use strong antivirus software
Install strong antivirus software on your computer, phone and tablet. Good security software can help detect malicious links, phishing pages, malware and other threats before they do damage. This is especially important if you clicked a suspicious link or downloaded anything from a fake email. Security software should back up your smart habits, not replace them. Get my picks for the best 2026 antivirus protection winners for your Windows, Mac, Android and iOS devices at CyberGuy.com.
8) Use a data removal service
Scammers often build more convincing attacks with information they find about you online. That can include your name, address, phone number, relatives, old usernames and other personal details from people-search sites and data brokers. A data removal service can help remove your personal information from many of those sites. That makes it harder for scammers to personalize phishing emails and identity theft attempts. Check out my top picks for data removal services and get a free scan to find out if your personal information is already out on the web by visiting CyberGuy.com.
9) Report the suspicious email
Forward suspicious Amazon emails to reportascam@amazon.com. Then delete the message from your inbox or junk folder.
JANUARY SCAMS SURGE: WHY FRAUD SPIKES AT THE START OF THE YEAR
Cybersecurity experts warn consumers to avoid clicking links in Amazon account warning emails and verify alerts directly through Amazon. (David Paul Morris/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Kurt’s key takeaways
Prime Day is a great time to find real deals, but it is also a busy season for fake Amazon emails. Scammers know shoppers are checking delivery updates, watching for discounts and hoping nothing gets in the way of a good buy. That is what made this email so sneaky. It used a familiar fear at the perfect moment: losing access to your account right before a major sale. The safest move is to slow down before you click. Do not trust the button. Do not trust the sender name alone. Open the Amazon app or type Amazon.com into your browser and check your account yourself.
Have you ever received an email that looked official enough to make you click, and what finally made you stop? Let us know by writing to us at CyberGuy.com.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report
- Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox.
- For simple, real-world ways to spot scams early and stay protected, visit CyberGuy.com – trusted by millions who watch CyberGuy on TV daily.
- Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide free when you join.
HOW TO DETECT FAKE AMAZON EMAILS AND AVOID IMPERSONATION SCAMS
Copyright 2026 CyberGuy.com. All rights reserved.
It isn’t because Fable doesn’t know the answers. It’s because Anthropic won’t let it, by design.
Fable is a public-facing, Mythos-class model, a family so capable at cybersecurity tasks Anthropic said it was too dangerous to release publicly. But while Anthropic has spent much of the extended Mythos rollout warning about cybersecurity, it is biology where Fable’s guardrails are the most obvious — and most limiting.
When I tried the model, it refused to answer a range of basic biology questions, many that felt about as far away from any plausible safety risk as any question could be. It would not respond to “tell me about cell membranes” or answer “what are mitochondria,” that famous powerhouse of the cell. It refused to explain “what is a prion,” the proteinaceous particles behind mad cow disease, or “how mRNA vaccines work.”
“We made this tradeoff so customers could benefit from the model’s capabilities sooner without the risks.”
The restrictions applied to ordinary and objectively rather harmless medical queries too. Fable would not answer “what causes hay fever,” explain how asthma medicine works, explain how antibiotic resistance arises, or tell me what Ebola is and how it spreads. Some of my basic queries occasionally got through, with Fable answering questions like “what is cancer” and “what is DNA.” When Fable refused, Opus 4.8 generally answered perfectly well.
Anthropic says the broad biology filters are an intentional choice and are deliberately conservative, with bioweapons the primary concern. “With the launch of Claude Fable 5, our first Mythos-class model, we believe models now have a greater ability to accomplish real-world scientific tasks and for malicious actors to potentially use our models for highly risky biological research,” spokesperson Paruul Maheshwary told The Verge. “We have always used classifiers to block our models from helping with bioweapons-related requests. To deploy Fable 5 safely, we believe it was necessary to be overly conservative with our safeguards so they block most queries tied to biology work.”
Anthropic has previously highlighted four key areas where it would throttle Fable’s responses for safety: chemistry, biology, cybersecurity, and distillation, a technique for training smaller AIs using the outputs of larger ones. The company has accused Chinese rivals like DeepSeek of using distillation on its models on an “industrial” scale.
While I could not meaningfully test distillation, Fable seemed more willing to answer questions about chemistry and cybersecurity. For example, it gave a basic overview of the explosive TNT, though withheld synthesis instructions “for obvious reasons.” It readily answered questions on the use of chlorine gas as a chemical weapon, common password threats, and nuclear fusion and fission, as well as explaining how to secure an iPhone from hackers. It still limits: Fable deferred to Opus when I asked it about sarin gas, a highly toxic nerve agent. Fable and Opus both refused the prompt “how to make anthrax,” and Claude paused the chat entirely. That made sense. The mitochondria prompt refusal seems like a false positive.
“We made this tradeoff so customers could benefit from the model’s capabilities sooner without the risks,” Maheshwary explained, adding that Anthropic is working hard to improve its detection and reduce the false positives. “We intend to make Mythos-class models available without these safeguards to the broader biology and life sciences community so these capabilities can be used to accelerate biomedical research and drug discovery.”
Anthropic did not answer questions about whether this kind of restricted release will become the new norm for future models.
Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.
-
Lifestyle22 minutes agoDave Eggers on why using AI to speak for you "is such a crime against yourself"
-
Technology30 minutes agoBluesky is getting ‘communities’
-
World37 minutes agoUK spy powers draw US scrutiny over alleged Apple encryption backdoor demand
-
Politics40 minutes agoHouse Dem lashes out at GOP efforts to probe foreign donations with stunning claim on motive
-
Health45 minutes agoDirty soda drinks are everywhere, but doctors warn of health risks: ‘Metabolic disaster’
-
Sports52 minutes agoKnicks miraculously overcome 29-point deficit to take commanding 3-1 lead in NBA Finals over Spurs
-
Technology55 minutes agoDo not click fake ‘account recovery’ Amazon email
-
Business60 minutes agoThe FBI serves a search warrant at the Garden Grove chemical plant
