Skip to content
NewsResearch

OpenAI and Anthropic rehearse 'day after' plans for a major AI catastrophe

· by Pondero Newsdesk

The short version

Axios and Decrypt reported October 9 that OpenAI and Anthropic are running tabletop exercises for the political and public backlash after a major AI-linked incident, which industry insiders expect within six to 12 months.

OpenAI and Anthropic rehearse 'day after' plans for a major AI catastrophe

Executives at OpenAI and Anthropic have been quietly running tabletop exercises for the backlash they expect after a major AI-linked catastrophe, a scenario industry insiders told Axios could arrive within six to 12 months, per Axios's October 9 report, confirmed by Decrypt.

What

The reports, published the same day by Axios and Decrypt, describe months of internal rehearsals covering public communications and policy strategy, per Decrypt's report. The scenario insiders fear most is a large-scale cyberattack that disrupts banking systems, internet access, power grids, or water supplies, per Axios. Anthropic chief executive Dario Amodei and OpenAI chief executive Sam Altman were named among the executives involved, alongside unnamed leaders at other AI companies. Specific preparations described in the reporting include red-team exercises that stress-test company defenses, protocols for briefing members of Congress quickly after an incident, and policy positioning worked out in advance rather than drafted under pressure. OpenAI told the outlets it "conducts preparedness exercises where teams discuss and work through a range of potential scenarios" that "are not treated as inevitable," per OpenAI's statement to Decrypt. Anthropic declined to comment on the reporting.

Labs are pre-writing the regulatory response before any incident happens

Both reports describe planning that assumes Democratic-led regulation would follow a major AI incident, which means the labs are preparing to shape the legislative response before lawmakers draft it themselves. For AI-tool operators and enterprises building on these platforms, the signal is less about the specific infrastructure scenario and more about the odds: the labs' own insiders are putting a six-to-12-month window on a catastrophic event serious enough to warrant congressional-briefing protocols. That is a short enough horizon that compliance teams at companies running agentic workflows against sensitive systems should expect fast-moving, incident-driven rule changes rather than a slow notice-and-comment process if something does go wrong. Anthropic's silence versus OpenAI's on-record statement is itself a data point: one lab is choosing to frame its preparedness publicly before anything happens, the other is not.

What to watch next

Watch for whether OpenAI or Anthropic says anything further about these exercises on the record, or whether a lawmaker or regulator asks either company to disclose the contents of its "day after" playbook before an actual incident forces the question.

Sources