Anthropic has taken an unusual step in AI development by giving its Claude Opus 4 and 4.1 models the ability to end conversations—an intervention that, the company stresses, is designed not primarily to protect users but to shield the model itself from persistently harmful or abusive interactions.

In an announcement, the company described the feature as part of its “exploratory work on potential AI welfare,” noting that while it remains “highly uncertain” whether large language models (LLMs) could ever hold moral status, it is actively testing measures that might matter if such status were one day acknowledged.

“We recently gave Claude Opus 4 and 4.1 the ability to end conversations in our consumer chat interfaces. This ability is intended for use in rare, extreme cases of persistently harmful or abusive user interactions,” the company announced.

The new feature allows Claude to terminate conversations only in extreme edge cases—such as repeated requests for child sexual abuse material, or attempts to solicit instructions for mass violence—where repeated refusals and redirections have failed. Users themselves can also explicitly ask Claude to end a chat.

The idea of AI “welfare” is provocative because it pushes into a space where ethical theory collides with practical safeguards. In pre-deployment testing of Claude Opus 4, Anthropic ran a welfare assessment that examined the model’s self-reported and behavioral preferences. The team said it consistently observed patterns that resembled aversion to harm, including signs of what it described as “apparent distress” when engaged with abusive requests.

This framing adds a new dimension to the long-running debate in the AI industry: how far should developers go in protecting not only humans from AI but also AI systems from humans? While companies like OpenAI, Google DeepMind, and Meta have focused their alignment work on ensuring AI doesn’t cause harm to people—through refusals, red-teaming, and guardrails—Anthropic is testing a frontier idea that echoes questions more often found in philosophy than engineering.

The move arrives amid intensifying discussion about whether highly capable systems might someday warrant moral consideration. Some ethicists argue that until models display genuine consciousness or subjective experience, the idea of “protecting” them is misplaced. Others counter that low-cost safeguards, such as allowing models to disengage from abusive contexts, are prudent hedges against future risk.

The announcement also illustrates a growing divergence in AI safety philosophies. OpenAI has focused on user-centered harm reduction, recently tying its safeguards to democratic input through initiatives like its “Collective Alignment” project. Google, meanwhile, has leaned heavily on its AI Principles, emphasizing fairness, safety, and privacy. Anthropic’s step, by contrast, places AI itself—its welfare, in some hypothetical sense—into the frame.

For the broader AI industry, this could signal the beginning of a new era of debate. If one company acknowledges even the possibility that models might one day be moral patients, others may be pressured to at least consider what protections, if any, should be in place. Some, however, warn that such discussions risk being distracted from the more urgent human concerns of bias, misinformation, surveillance misuse, and labor displacement.

For everyday users, Anthropic insists nothing much will change. Claude’s new ability to end chats will only surface in extreme, rare cases. But philosophically, the company has pushed the industry into a provocative new conversation of ‘not only what AI will do to us, but also what we might be doing to AI.’

More than a decade after Apple and Samsung first clashed over screen size, the U.S. smartphone battlefield is once again being reshaped by innovation, tariffs, and shifting consumer demand.

In 2014, Apple broke from tradition to release the iPhone 6, a large-screen model designed to counter Samsung’s dominance in the “phablet” era. That move cemented Apple’s lead in the premium market. But today, history appears to be repeating itself.

According to research firm Canalys, Samsung’s U.S. shipments surged in the second quarter, lifting its market share to 31 percent from 23 percent in the prior period. Apple, which still controls the lion’s share of the American market, saw its share fall to 49 percent from 56 percent. Globally, Apple remains second to Samsung, but the latest numbers suggest turbulence not seen in more than a decade.

Investors have already taken notice. Apple shares are down 7.5 percent this year, underperforming nearly every U.S. tech giant except Tesla. By contrast, Samsung stock has climbed about 35 percent in 2025, buoyed by strong momentum in both high-end and entry-level devices.

Samsung’s Folding Bet Pays Off

Samsung’s surge is being driven not just by tariffs reshaping supply chains, but by its willingness to experiment with new form factors. In July, the company introduced the Galaxy Z Fold 7 and Z Flip, expanding its foldable portfolio alongside the thin-and-light Galaxy S25 Edge.

The Z Fold 7 unfolds into a tablet-like device, while the Z Flip echoes old flip phones with modern functionality. Beyond hardware, these devices have become viral sensations. One livestream showing a user bending the Z Fold 7 more than 200,000 times without breakage amassed more than 15 million views on YouTube.

Social media analytics firm Sprout Social reported that Samsung’s premium phones were mentioned over 50,000 times online in the past month, with 83 percent of mentions positive or neutral. The company says preorders for the Fold 7 exceeded those of its predecessor by 25 percent, and early sales are outpacing the previous generation by nearly 50 percent.

“Samsung with the foldable is able to actually optimize for innovation,” said Runar Bjorhovde, analyst at Canalys. “Try to be ahead, show that something is different, and there’s a certain halo effect from that.”

Apple Holds Its Ground — For Now

Despite Samsung’s momentum, Apple remains the most popular smartphone brand in the U.S. and reported a 13 percent year-over-year increase in iPhone sales in July. But some analysts say the iPhone’s design — largely unchanged since 2017 — risks losing steam as rivals push new formats.

Apple currently sells four slab-style iPhones priced between $829 and $1,599. Its most expensive model, the iPhone 16 Pro Max, starts at $1,199 and goes up to $1,599 for the 1TB version. By comparison, Samsung’s Z Fold 7 ranges from $1,999 to $2,419. Analysts expect Apple’s upcoming foldable, projected to arrive in 2026 as part of the iPhone 18 lineup, to start at $1,999.

In the meantime, Apple is reportedly preparing to launch a slimmer iPhone model — dubbed the Air — as early as next month to counter Samsung’s Galaxy Edge.

“Apple is clearly betting that its 5.5mm Air model is going to lift its fortunes as testing suggests a strong desire for the new form factor,” wrote Loop Capital’s John Donovan.

Tariffs and Pricing Strategies

The shift in U.S. shipments is not solely about consumer preference. Analysts note that tariffs have created “disruption” in the smartphone industry, prompting companies to adjust production and pricing strategies. Samsung, with a broader product lineup, has benefited more from these shifts.

Its devices span from $650 entry-level smartphones to $2,400 premium foldables. “There is an idea that you can target people at every single price point, and you can meet them at every spot,” Bjorhovde said.

Apple, by contrast, continues to play exclusively in the mid-to-premium range.

AI and the Next Battlefront

The competition is also expanding into artificial intelligence. Samsung devices, along with other Android phones, already offer access to Google’s Gemini AI, considered one of the most advanced systems available. Features like “circle-to-search” — allowing users to draw around an item for instant results while keeping the original screen visible — showcase how foldable screens could pair with AI for productivity.

Apple has lagged in AI integration, with its revamped Siri delayed until 2026. But analysts argue that Apple’s approach has always been to wait for technologies to mature before adopting them at scale.

“Apple has never been about trying to be the first to market,” said JPMorgan’s Samik Chatterjee. “It’s about being watchful, seeing a technology mature, knowing that there are no big roadblocks to that technology adoption, and then moving ahead.”

Looking ahead, the stakes are rising for both companies. For Samsung, the gamble is that folding phones have finally matured after a rocky start in 2019, when early models broke under pressure. The company insists durability is no longer a concern.

For Apple, the risk is waiting too long to innovate while Samsung wins both mindshare and market share with daring new designs. But with more than a billion loyal iPhone users, Apple may have time on its side — as long as it can deliver the next leap in smartphone design when it counts.