Jeremy Banon

Tricky new phishing technique someone just tried on me: abusing an actual google recovery contact request form and stuffing it with a really long message that contains a phishing link. The true message is shoved after several pages of blank space at the bottom.

NYP Reporter: Prior to boarding Air Force One to depart Beijing, the entire U.S. delegation disposed of every item provided to them by their Chinese hosts. Gifts, badges, pins, and commemorative items were all dumped into a trash bin on site. The directive was absolute, no item of Chinese origin was permitted to board the aircraft. The precautions extended beyond the departure itself. Delegation members had left all personal electronic devices at home before traveling to China and operated exclusively on clean burner phones throughout the duration of the trip.

I am surprised more people are not paying attention to this update from Anthropic on its stock policy. This seems like a potential bombshell. There is an active secondary market purportedly in Anthropic stock or derivatives including on fairly reputable (or at least well-known) platforms like Forge. Anthropic is calling them out *specifically*, by name, and essentially *saying* 100% of these are illegal. Some may be frauds (people selling Anthropic stock or interests in Anthropic stock that they don't truly own), but more likely many are legit attempts at transferring Anthropic equity (directly, as SPV shares, or as some type of 'beneficial interest' or future, etc.) Anthropic appears to be saying it will treat all these transfers as void. I don't have access to their terms, but it's very interesting to think what this could mean. Do the 'first purported sellers' in the chain potentially have an opportunity to do a double-dip? Does the first seller and all downstream buyers get the entire entitlement nuked? Anthropic is threatening that--are they just bluffing? If they're not bluffing, what litigation is likely to ensue? This can get into really esoteric areas of corporate law that depend on exactly how the transfer restrictions are drafted as well as the language around how violations of transfer restrictions are treated--for example, if they are merely voidABLE then downstream buyers can assert various equitable claims/defenses, but if they are VOID ab initio then in some jurisdictions that forecloses equitable defenses.