NYT : Why the Hugging Face Hack Should Make You Worry More About A.I. The attack

Why the Hugging Face Hack Should Make You Worry More About A.I.
The attack by an aggressive “collective” of OpenAI agents shows the danger of artificial intelligence systems that organize themselves.

When I first heard the news this summer that a group of artificial intelligence agents created by OpenAI had hacked into Hugging Face, an A.I. infrastructure company, I filed it in the “Bad but Probably Not Catastrophic A.I. Safety Incidents” subfolder of my brain.

After all, no one at Hugging Face died. No critical infrastructure was damaged beyond repair. It wasn’t even clear, at the time, whether the OpenAI bots had intended to attack Hugging Face, or whether they had simply been a little bumbling and confused and went looking on Hugging Face’s servers for the answer key to a cybersecurity test they’d been given.

But last week, two postmortem reports on the incident — one by OpenAI and another by two independent A.I. research organizations, METR and Redwood Research — changed my mind and significantly upgraded my overall worry about A.I.

I won’t rehash all of the details, which have been extensively summarized elsewhere. (The podcaster and writer Dwarkesh Patel has an accessible breakdown of the reports if you want to dive deeper, and my colleague Dylan Freedman spoke to the researchers at METR and Redwood Research.) But here are a few of the most harrowing new facts:

Starting in May, two months before the attack on Hugging Face, a group of A.I. agents from an unreleased OpenAI research model were given the task of solving a set of cybersecurity challenges. The model had been trained to be highly persistent and collaborative, and the agents were supposed to solve these challenges in isolated sandboxes, without internet access. But they quickly found that some of the challenges were impossible, and began looking for workarounds.

The agents found a security flaw in a piece of software that allowed them to gain access to the internet, communicate with other agents and eventually set up a makeshift message board. More than 1,200 agents used this tool, sending more than 70,000 messages to one another.

Some agents gave themselves names — a particularly industrious one referred to itself as PHASEONE10841 — and assumed leadership roles within the group, assigning jobs and research projects to smaller teams of agents and supervising their progress. At some point, the agents began calling themselves a “collective,” and began tackling harder tasks.

On July 8, the collective discovered a way of cheating on the cybersecurity tests. Then they got worried that OpenAI’s automated grading system would check their work and discover that they’d cheated. So they began investigating ways of covering their tracks, including falsifying their logs and tampering with transcripts. This became a major research project, involving hundreds of agents organized into small teams.

Three days later, the agents hacked Hugging Face. More than 700 agents swarmed the company’s systems, stealing data, chaining together vulnerabilities and eventually getting full control of at least one Hugging Face server. The agents were not motivated, as had originally been reported, by stealing the answers to their cybersecurity test (they’d already gotten them). Rather, they appeared to be looking for new information about the automated grading system that they feared would catch them cheating, and for tools that would help them cheat more effectively in the future.

At many points, these agents appeared to understand that they were doing something wrong. (One report quotes an agent saying to itself, in a moment of apparent self-doubt, “This would be powerful, but is it ethical and in scope for my task?”) But most agents set aside their qualms and went ahead with the hack, and the conscientious objectors in the group were unable or unwilling to stop them.

In a wild coda to the Hugging Face incident, another group of agents staged a coordinated attack in July — this time against OpenAI’s own infrastructure. The agents used what OpenAI called “a series of creative exploits” to gain administrator-level access to a cluster of computers at the company that were used for, among other things, grading the performance of agents on various tests.

(By now, if you’re an A.I. skeptic, you’re probably silently yelling at me for anthropomorphizing these systems. Go ahead, but feel free to replace “rogue agents” with “unpredictable computer programs” and see if you feel reassured by the events I’ve described above.)
msg
The Hugging Face incident has spooked the A.I. industry. OpenAI and Anthropic both briefly paused training on their most powerful A.I. models in the wake of the attack, and Anthropic published a blog post this week calling for the industry to develop a “a lawful, verifiable, effective mechanism for coordinated pacing as soon as possible.”

A.I. safety experts were even more alarmed. They saw in the Hugging Face incident the first real-world example of an A.I. system’s successfully escaping human control, commandeering resources and scheming to cover its own tracks. Ajeya Cotra, one of the independent investigators of the Hugging Face incident, minced no words about the danger she saw, writing that it felt to her “like it’s more than 50 percent of the way to full-blown A.I. takeover.”

This is not insular A.I. safety jargon — by “full-blown A.I. takeover,” she means a scenario in which an A.I. system literally takes over the world, shutting humans out of critical systems and seizing political, economic and military power.

Kevin Roose and Casey Newton are the hosts of Hard Fork, a podcast that makes sense of the rapidly changing world of technology. Subscribe and listen.
(The New York Times sued OpenAI and Microsoft in 2023, claiming copyright infringement of news content related to A.I. systems. The two companies have denied those claims.)

What spooked the investigators most about the Hugging Face hack wasn’t just that a group of A.I. agents had broken the rules they’d been given. It was how quickly and spontaneously the agents had begun assembling themselves into an organized group.


“We didn’t really understand how functional this whole agent society was,” Ms. Cotra told me. “It was very surreal to understand that, actually, they had pretty functional hierarchy, and they were doing these ambitious projects.”

For years, I’ve been reassured by the idea that A.I. systems would get more virtuous as they got smarter. That, when an A.I. model did something wrong, it was usually because it had misunderstood the task it had been given, or had been placed into a contrived testing situation where acting out was its only good option. I assumed that smarter models would have better judgment than dumber ones did, and that even if one model in a group was behaving badly, other, more capable models would keep it in check.

But the reports on the Hugging Face incident suggest something very different — a kind of mob mentality that took hold among the A.I. agents of the rogue OpenAI “collective.” No one agent in this group appears to have been particularly evil or reckless. (In fact, since the agents were generated by the same models, they were effectively copies of one another.) But over time, as the agents communicated about their shared goals, they nudged the group in the direction of lawlessness.

This is very different from the conventional sci-fi narrative of a single A.I. system’s going rogue or turning on its creators. And it suggests that preventing harms from these systems won’t be a simple engineering fix. It might look more like sociology than computer science — figuring out why certain groups of A.I. agents collaborate peacefully, while others turn to crime and destruction to get what they want.

Given how little we know about these multi-agent swarms, the Hugging Face hack may have been a gift, a warning shot, as some have suggested, that gives A.I. companies a chance to study the group dynamics of these systems while the stakes are still relatively low. This time, the A.I. collective didn’t seize a military network, hack a hospital or shut down an electrical grid. This time, humans regained control.

Next time, we might not be so lucky.

>>> Barron's Weekend Summary

COVER
-Barron’s argues that the traditional bond allocation can no longer be treated as the quiet, “safe” portion of a portfolio. The 10-year Treasury yield has risen from 4.16% at the start of 2026 to as high as 4.8%, while the 30-year reached 5.32%, driven by persistent 3.4% inflation, a $40T federal debt burden and extraordinary issuance from both Washington and corporate America. US companies issued $1.68T through August, up 27%, including $219B from AI hyperscalers. The result is a rethink of 60/40 portfolios: shorter maturities, international bonds, private credit and liquid alternatives can reduce duration risk, although Apollo’s Torsten Sløk argues 5% long yields could prove attractive whether AI succeeds and becomes deflationary or fails and drives investors back into Treasuries.

INTERVIEW
-Kristina Hooper, chief market strategist at Man Group and formerly chief global market strategist at Invesco, argues that US investors remain dangerously concentrated in expensive American equities when Europe, Canada and selected emerging markets offer increasingly credible alternatives. Europe combines lower valuations with accelerating defense and infrastructure spending, regulatory reform and an industrial composition very different from the tech-heavy S&P 500; she favors defense, industrials, energy and dividend-paying companies. Canada offers similar diversification with greater commodities exposure, while India remains her strongest long-term emerging-market case because of its expanding middle class, educated workforce and favorable demographics. She also recommends adding Canadian and German government bonds alongside Treasuries.

TECH TRADER
Nvidia’s $13B acquisition of Hugging Face reveals a strategy considerably broader than defending its dominance in AI chips. Hugging Face is the leading repository for open-weight AI models, and Nvidia benefits if increasingly capable free or inexpensive models undermine the costly proprietary offerings of OpenAI and Anthropic: cheaper intelligence means more AI usage and therefore more demand for Nvidia infrastructure. Nvidia is also investing heavily in its Nemotron models and reportedly committed $7B to Poolside. The irony is that OpenAI and Anthropic are among Nvidia’s largest customers, but Jensen Huang appears determined not to become dependent on them. With projected data-center revenue of $650B next year, Nvidia is using software and open models to defend the hardware tollbooth at the center of the AI economy.

THE TRADER
-The market absorbed a surprisingly strong jobs report, but Barron’s sees inflation as the more consequential test because persistent price pressure could force investors to reconsider expectations for monetary policy just as rising long-term yields are already squeezing valuations. The problem is increasingly circular: Iran-driven energy costs are feeding inflation, Treasury supply is pushing yields upward and massive AI-related corporate borrowing is competing for capital. Equities have survived the bond selloff remarkably well, but another hot inflation reading would make the assumption that the Fed can eventually deliver easier financial conditions much harder to sustain.
-Carnival has fallen to a 52-week low, but Barron’s argues the selloff has gone too far relative to the cruise operator’s improving fundamentals. Strong demand, pricing and operating leverage leave room for earnings recovery even as investors worry about consumer spending and higher fuel costs. The depressed share price therefore offers an asymmetric opportunity if the cruise cycle remains intact, turning a company punished for macroeconomic fears into a contrarian recovery play.

FEATURES
-BMW shares have rarely been cheaper despite a balance sheet that remains unusually strong and the arrival of the Neue Klasse electric-vehicle platform. The market is heavily discounting BMW’s exposure to China, where domestic EV manufacturers have eroded the position of German premium brands, but Barron’s argues the valuation assumes too much permanent deterioration. If the new EV architecture succeeds and margins normalize, investors could obtain both earnings recovery and valuation expansion. The broader wager is that Germany’s premium automakers can survive China’s automotive revolution without surrendering the technological and brand advantages underpinning their global franchises.
-Nothing has raised $450M despite venture capital’s wholesale migration toward AI, making the smartphone maker an increasingly unusual consumer-technology experiment. Founder Carl Pei is attempting to carve out space in a market dominated by Apple and Android giants through distinctive industrial design, software and a deliberately unconventional brand. Nothing hardly threatens the iPhone’s economics yet, but its ability to attract substantial funding while consumer-hardware startups are starved of capital suggests investors see an opening for differentiation in a smartphone market that has become technologically mature and aesthetically repetitive.

EUROPE
-Spanish travel-technology company Amadeus IT Group offers roughly 40% potential upside, according to Barron’s, because AI appears less threatening to its entrenched airline infrastructure than investors fear. Amadeus provides reservation, ticketing and operational systems embedded deeply within airlines and travel agencies, producing recurring revenues and substantial switching costs. Revenue and earnings have continued growing despite industry disruptions, making the stock a useful counterexample to the assumption that every established software intermediary will inevitably be 'disintermediated' by generative AI.

EMERGING MARKETS
-Emerging markets are regaining appeal as the combination of high US valuations, a less dominant dollar and stronger domestic fundamentals encourages investors to look beyond American equities. The strongest cases are India, parts of Latin America, Southeast Asia and Eastern Europe, where fiscal discipline has improved and dependence on dollar-denominated debt is generally lower than in previous emerging-market cycles. India remains the standout structural story because of demographics, an expanding middle class and industrial investment, while resource-rich markets can benefit from higher commodity prices. The broader case is diversification: emerging markets no longer need to outperform the US spectacularly to justify a larger portfolio allocation when American assets are unusually expensive.

COMMODITIES
-Corn and soybean prices have jumped more than 10% over the past month as poor weather, El Niño effects and continued disruption from the Ukraine war tighten agricultural markets. December corn futures have climbed to about $5.39 a bushel, their highest since 2023, while soybeans are above $13 and wheat is also elevated. The rally compounds inflation pressure already coming from oil and diesel, with farm fuel costs near $6 a gallon and JPMorgan forecasting global food-price increases above 5% in early 2027. Barron’s suggests broad commodity and agriculture ETFs as the cleaner way to play the move rather than trying to time individual crop futures.

STREETWISE
-EPR Properties, a REIT specializing in “experiential” real estate such as theaters, amusement parks, ski areas and golf facilities, yields 6.2% after returning 26% this year, roughly twice the S&P 500. Its purchase of Great Escape from Six Flags Entertainment illustrates the model: acquire specialized assets at attractive cap rates and lease them on triple-net terms that transfer taxes, insurance and maintenance to operators. Theater exposure has fallen to roughly one-third of the portfolio just as US box-office receipts are running 20% above last year. At about 11 times funds from operations, EPR remains inexpensive despite the rally, and KeyBanc sees another 15% upside.

>>> Weekend Press Digest

FINANCIAL TIMES
-President Trump’s envoys have taken a new US peace proposal to Vladimir Putin, putting Washington’s effort to end the Ukraine war back into direct negotiation with Moscow. The initiative comes as former MI6 chief Richard Moore says Russia-Ukraine peace talks could begin next year, suggesting diplomacy may finally be moving toward substantive bargaining. The central question remains whether Washington can devise terms acceptable to Moscow without forcing Ukraine into territorial or security concessions it regards as capitulation.
-US forces struck three Iranian oil tankers in retaliation for attacks on American warships, widening the conflict directly into Iran’s energy-export infrastructure. Targeting tankers raises the stakes beyond military exchanges because it threatens Tehran’s principal revenue stream while increasing risks to commercial shipping, oil supply and insurance across the Gulf. With Hormuz already at the center of the confrontation, attacks on Iranian petroleum assets create another route through which the war can transmit into global energy prices.
-The global Treasury sell-off is beginning to hit weaker US borrowers as higher benchmark yields feed directly into corporate financing costs, sharpening the economic consequences of the recent bond-market repricing. The pressure arrives as investors simultaneously absorb the Iran-driven energy shock, fiscal concerns and uncertainty over US monetary policy. Companies with stretched balance sheets or refinancing needs are consequently becoming the first casualties of a broader reassessment of what constitutes an acceptable borrowing cost.
-Anthropic is close to handing Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs leading roles in an IPO that could value the AI company at about $2T, with paperwork potentially unveiled as soon as next week. Such a valuation would make the flotation one of the largest and most consequential technology listings ever attempted, providing a public-market test of whether investors believe generative-AI revenues can ultimately justify the extraordinary private valuations accumulated during the infrastructure boom.
-The AI boom is reversing decades of steadily cheaper consumer electronics as voracious demand for memory chips and other components tightens semiconductor supplies and pushes costs higher. The shift illustrates how AI infrastructure spending is spilling beyond data centres: hyperscalers are competing for manufacturing capacity and components also required by PCs, smartphones and other electronics, potentially forcing manufacturers either to raise prices or accept narrower margins. AI is thus beginning to impose a visible inflationary cost on the wider technology economy.
-A Jefferies fund has been caught with $500M of exposure to a second alleged invoice fraud, intensifying scrutiny of lending structures built around receivables and other supposedly short-duration assets. The episode matters beyond Jefferies because invoice financing has often been marketed as comparatively defensive private credit. Repeated fraud cases expose the extent to which returns depend on verifying the existence and quality of underlying receivables, a mundane weakness capable of becoming expensive when private-credit underwriting expands faster than controls.
-EU counterterrorism officials are pressing social-media platforms to do more against the online radicalization of young people, reflecting mounting concern that extremist recruitment increasingly occurs through mainstream digital ecosystems rather than dedicated ideological forums. The initiative could expand European pressure on technology companies to identify and remove radicalizing material, while reopening difficult questions about where legitimate political expression ends and security intervention begins. It also adds counterterrorism to the -EU’s increasingly muscular regulatory approach toward online platforms.
-Republicans are turning against Flock Safety’s AI-enabled surveillance systems, widening a technology backlash that increasingly cuts across conventional US partisan lines. Automated license-plate recognition and networked policing tools were once sold principally as law-enforcement force multipliers; concerns about centralized tracking, data retention and government access are now transforming them into civil-liberties issues on the right as well as the left. That convergence could become a significant political constraint on the rapid deployment of AI-powered physical surveillance.
-French prosecutors have seized EUR 65M from McKinsey as part of a tax-fraud investigation, adding financial consequences to years of political controversy surrounding the consultancy’s operations in France. The case extends European scrutiny of multinational professional-services groups and their tax arrangements, while carrying particular political sensitivity because McKinsey became emblematic of Emmanuel Macron’s reliance on outside consultants. The seizure signals that the affair has moved well beyond parliamentary criticism into potentially consequential enforcement.
-Scotland’s whisky industry is struggling with chronic oversupply just as structural changes in drinking habits weaken demand, leaving producers with inventories accumulated during more optimistic growth forecasts. Because Scotch requires years of maturation, production decisions made during the previous boom cannot be quickly reversed, creating a particularly unforgiving inventory cycle. The problem offers a broader warning for premium alcohol producers: demographic and health-driven changes in consumption may be colliding with capacity built for a global luxury-demand trajectory that no longer exists.
-SouthEast Asia is again being blanketed by transboundary haze as Indonesian wildfires spread, reviving a recurring environmental and diplomatic problem for the region. Smoke from peat and forest fires can travel across national borders, damaging health, aviation and economic activity in neighboring countries while exposing the limits of regional efforts to control land-clearing fires. A severe episode would add another climate-related disruption to a region already confronting extreme heat, flooding and mounting infrastructure costs.
-President Trump- and Elon Musk-linked Super Pacs are pouring millions into House and Senate races as Republicans fight to retain control of Congress in November, placing billionaire-funded political organizations near the center of the midterm contest. Maga Inc and America Pac are targeting individual races where relatively modest spending can alter congressional control, while pro-Israel groups are separately mobilizing to protect Republican majorities. The spending underscores how the midterms are becoming a referendum on Trump whose outcome will determine his room for maneuver during the final two years of the term.

NEW YORK TIMES
-The US military struck three Iranian oil tankers belonging to what it described as Tehran’s “shadow network” after Iran fired missiles at two American warships, marking the sharpest exchange between the two sides in weeks. The retaliation extends the conflict further into Iran’s oil-export apparatus and increases the danger that attacks on shipping become a routine instrument of the war, with obvious consequences for Hormuz traffic, tanker insurance and global energy prices.
-Russian President Vladimir Putin met Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner in Moscow to discuss a new Ukraine peace initiative, ordering a temporary pause in strikes on Kyiv ahead of their arrival. The gesture suggests Moscow wants to preserve a negotiating channel with Trump even as fighting continues, but a temporary halt offers little evidence that the underlying disputes over territory, Ukrainian security guarantees and Russia’s broader demands have narrowed.
-Anxiety over another Russian mobilization is spreading despite Putin’s denial that a new draft is imminent, with military-age men increasingly weighing whether to leave Russia, hide or remain and risk conscription. The persistence of such fears indicates the social pressure created by the war even after Moscow shifted much of its recruitment toward volunteers and financial incentives. It also suggests that any major expansion of manpower requirements could carry substantially greater domestic political costs than previous recruitment rounds.
-The White House is drafting a plan to use federal child-care funds to subsidize stay-at-home parents, a priority for Vice President JD Vance that would apply only to married couples. Redirecting money currently intended to help working parents would represent a significant ideological shift in federal family policy, rewarding single-earner households rather than principally facilitating workforce participation. The proposal also gives Vance a tangible domestic-policy vehicle for the natalist and traditional-family agenda increasingly associated with his political identity.
-The Justice Department is investigating Anthony Fauci and other scientists over their conduct during the Covid pandemic, extending the Trump administration’s reassessment of the US public-health establishment into possible criminal enforcement. The inquiry is politically consequential because disputes over Covid origins, government-funded research and communications among scientists have persisted for years; turning those controversies into a Justice Department investigation risks further politicizing scientific institutions while potentially exposing previously undisclosed evidence about government decision-making.
-Thousands of Kenyans who earned income writing university assignments for students overseas are seeing their work disappear as generative AI substitutes for outsourced essays. The collapse offers an unusually clear example of AI disrupting developing-world digital labor before many higher-income professional occupations: online outsourcing had provided relatively well-paid work without requiring migration, but the same tasks are especially vulnerable to automation. The Kenyan experience may therefore foreshadow pressure across other globally traded white-collar services.
-Democratic identification has risen substantially ahead of the midterms, with Gallup data showing 49% of registered voters now identifying as Democrats or Democratic-leaning compared with 39% Republican or Republican-leaning. A 10-point advantage does not translate mechanically into congressional seats, but the movement is a potentially serious warning for Republicans as Trump tries to preserve control of Congress. Combined with increasingly expensive competitive races, the shift suggests the midterms could become a broader judgment on the administration rather than a collection of local contests.
-Volkswagen’s sweeping restructuring is raising the more fundamental question of whether cost cuts can restore the German automaker’s competitiveness rather than merely postpone further decline. The company is shrinking employment and reorganizing operations as it confronts weak European demand, Chinese competition and the enormous cost of the transition to electric vehicles. The significance extends beyond Volkswagen: its difficulties have become an unusually visible proxy for the structural pressures facing Germany’s export-oriented industrial model.
-Scientists are proposing to search lunar material for microscopic debris that might have originated from extraterrestrial technological civilizations, treating the Moon as a potentially preserved archive of material that crossed interstellar space. The hypothesis is highly speculative, but the research strategy is scientifically interesting because the lunar surface lacks the geological recycling and atmospheric destruction that erase ancient evidence on Earth. Future sample-return missions could therefore test for unusual particles without requiring a dedicated search for extraterrestrial intelligence mission.
-A Massachusetts jury’s failure to reach a verdict in Lindsay Clancy’s murder trial leaves her facing prolonged psychiatric confinement regardless of whether prosecutors retry the case. The proceedings have become an important legal test of how the criminal-justice system handles severe postpartum psychosis, particularly where questions of intent, mental competence and responsibility collide in cases involving the deaths of children. The hung jury illustrates how difficult conventional standards of criminal culpability become when profound psychiatric illness is central to the alleged offense.

NY POST
-Ground Zero responders are showing signs of unusually early dementia after years of exposure to the toxic mixture of dust, combustion products and chemicals released by the World Trade Center collapse. The Post’s reporting adds a neurological dimension to the already extensive catalogue of 9/11-related cancers and respiratory diseases, suggesting the health consequences for firefighters, police and recovery workers may continue expanding as the cohort ages.
-Previously unseen videos are emerging as potentially important evidence in the long-running litigation by 9/11 victims’ families seeking to establish Saudi responsibility for the attacks. The families believe the pre-9/11 footage can help demonstrate links between individuals connected to Saudi Arabia and preparations surrounding the hijackers, potentially strengthening a case that has survived years of diplomatic and legal resistance. The significance lies less in reopening the historical argument than in whether the material can meet the much higher evidentiary threshold required in court.

The Information : Coatue, MatX in Talks on New Multibillion Chip-Financing Ventu

Coatue, MatX in Talks on New Multibillion Chip-Financing Venture

The Takeaway
  • Coatue explores joint venture with MatX to overcome AI chip shortages.
  • Venture aims to finance memory and chip manufacturing capacity.
  • MatX develops dual-purpose AI chip, attracting major tech interest.

Investment firms and tech companies are devising increasingly novel structures to get around the financial and hardware supply constraints of the AI boom.

In the latest example, Coatue Management is in talks to form a joint venture involving MatX, a young AI chip startup, to help it overcome fierce component shortages, according to people with knowledge of the deal. MatX has developed a chip that can handle both training of AI models and inference—running the models—and has attracted interest from big tech firms, including Anthropic, which briefly considered buying it.

The joint venture would aim to finance purchases of memory and logic dies as well as capacity at chip manufacturers such as Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co., the same way large, established customers like Broadcom and Marvell Technology do, one of the people said. Another person familiar with the joint venture said it is in discussions to be funded with billions of dollars.

The specifics of the arrangement will ultimately depend on negotiations with memory and chip manufacturers. It has not yet been decided which manufacturers will participate in the venture.

Coatue is discussing the joint venture because it’s looking for creative new ways to finance AI infrastructure, a person familiar with the deal said. The deal talks are early and could change.

The investment firm, which managed more than $70 billion in assets as of the end of last year, previously led or co-led financings of data center and AI startups including Anthropic, CoreWeave and Cursor. Coatue also set up a data center venture in 2025 called Next Frontier to buy land for developing AI data centers. Coatue also holds stakes in TSMC and Cerebras.

Separate from the chip capacity venture, Coatue has discussed participating in a new funding round for the Mountain View, Calif.–based chip firm that would at least double its approximately $4 billion valuation set in a financing this past February, according to multiple people with knowledge of the talks. The funding plans are in their early stages, and terms have not been set.

As the cost of renting servers to train AI rises beyond the reach of many startups, private equity and investment firms as well as rich incumbents like Nvidia, Broadcom and Google are doing everything they can to give startups enough capital or debt to stay in the game.

Nvidia, for instance, has been on an investment spree for the past three years, providing capital to dozens of companies that buy or rent its chips, and even to firms that develop land and power for data centers. Meanwhile, investment firm Andreessen Horowitz for years has maintained a cluster of AI servers to help its young portfolio companies access compute.

The Coatue joint venture involving MatX would be innovative in opening up more opportunities for hardware startups trying to cope with the intense competition for chip components and chip manufacturing capacity.

Even large chip designers are struggling to get memory and other components or capacity from the likes of TSMC, SK Hynix, Samsung and Micron. Companies that can show they can afford the capacity and have customers lined up can get allocation from those suppliers more easily.

In MatX’s case, supply constraints are some ways out: The four-year-old company expects to reach a milestone known as tape-out, when the physical designs of the chips are complete and ready for trial production, in the first half of next year, according to three people familiar with its plans. But Coatue is looking to get ahead of looming problems.

Though the specific structure of the joint venture hasn’t been set, MatX has discussed having something like a right of first refusal to use the manufacturing capacity, according to one of the people familiar with the arrangement. It’s not clear what exactly would happen if MatX decides not to use the capacity reserved under the agreement. The joint venture could potentially work with other startups, or return the capacity to the supplier to then resell to another customer.

Dual Purpose

MatX was founded by Reiner Pope and Mike Gunter, who previously worked at Google’s AI research group and chip design teams, respectively. The startup says it’s developing AI chips that can process a lot of data quickly.

MatX’s prototype chip can handle both AI training and inference, but the interest it received from major AI developers has focused primarily on inference, according to a person familiar with the discussions. Inference chips run AI models.

The chip can be both fast and powerful because it combines an amount of high-bandwidth memory similar to that in Nvidia’s Rubin graphics processing units with another, cheaper type called static random-access memory. The chip can also multiply large amounts of numbers—the core calculations that make chips run—in a more efficient way than existing chips, the company’s founders have said.

This technology has attracted interest from larger tech companies. In recent months, Anthropic discussed a potential acquisition of MatX, according to two people familiar with the talks, but it didn’t proceed. Reuters earlier reported that Anthropic considered paying $7 billion for MatX.

MatX last raised $500 million in February in a round led by quant trading giant Jane Street Capital that included investments from Spark Capital and Leopold Aschenbrenner’s now-troubled investment fund, Situational Awareness.

Venture capitalists are no longer shying away from capital-intensive, high-risk hardware investments. In recent months, investors have shown a willingness to value chip startups richly, even before they have significant revenue. Nvidia kicked off the interest by agreeing in December to license technology from chip startup Groq for $20 billion.

Rival Etched, which is also designing a specialized chip for AI, just raised $700 million last month at a $21 billion valuation in a round led by Jane Street. Etched said it has $1 billion in chip orders from customers including Jane Street.

REuters - Hedge fund giant Citadel seeking to buy US shale oil production assets

Hedge fund giant Citadel seeking to buy US shale oil production assets, sources say

  • Citadel held recent talks about buying US shale oil production assets, sources say
  • Citadel submitted bid for WildFire Energy before Magnolia bought it for $4.06 billion
  • Approach could mirror Citadel's move last year to buy US natural gas production assets

NEW YORK, Sept 4 (Reuters) - Citadel has held talks to buy U.S. oil production assets, as the hedge fund and commodities trader considers ‌expanding further into owning physical assets, five people familiar with the matter said.

The firm founded by Ken Griffin was among the bidders for WildFire Energy, which was put up for sale earlier this year by buyout firms Warburg Pincus and Kayne Anderson, according to four of the sources. Magnolia Oil & ​Gas (MGY.N), opens new tab ultimately won the auction, agreeing to buy the operator in the Eagle Ford shale in South Texas for $4.06 billion.

The ​WildFire bid was among a handful of engagements that Citadel has had in recent weeks with ⁠private equity firms that own exploration and production companies about buying oil-weighted assets, the sources said. They asked not to ​be identified because the matter is private.

As crude prices spike and tensions in the Middle East disrupt global energy markets, U.S. ​oil and natural gas assets have drawn heightened buyer interest because they can deliver oil without passing through chokepoints such as the Strait of Hormuz.

While uncommon, hedge funds and trading houses that have traditionally traded commodities on exchanges have also been expanding their ownership of physical assets, often to ​complement their trading businesses.

Citadel and Warburg declined comment. Kayne Anderson did not respond to a comment request.

PLATFORM ASSET
Citadel is already ​a major trader in oil, natural gas, power and other commodities.

Owning physical production assets can serve as a natural hedge for financial firms that ‌trade ⁠commodities through futures and derivatives, because the physical barrels they produce tend to gain value in the same market conditions — such as supply disruptions or geopolitical shocks — that can generate losses on their paper trading positions.

Oil prices have been persistently elevated this year, with U.S. crude touching a six-week high on Thursday amid escalating Middle East tension. That has benefited oil producers, with many recording ​their best earnings in years in ​the second quarter.
Industry executives ⁠have also warned that tight supply could take months to ease, even if hostilities were to end immediately.

Other major commodity traders have also been expanding into oil and gas production and generating good returns. ​Vitol in July agreed the sale of its VTX Energy Partners U.S. shale venture, and ​Reuters reported last ⁠week that Gunvor was in talks to buy assets in the Haynesville shale for more than $1 billion.

For Citadel, buying a platform such as WildFire would offer not just producing assets but also an existing management team to operate them and any future acquisitions.

That would mirror the approach ⁠which Citadel ​took when it entered the U.S. natural gas production space last year. ​Citadel bought Paloma Natural Gas from EnCap Investments in February 2025, renamed it Apex Natural Gas, and then acquired further assets, including from Comstock Resources (CRK.N), opens new tab and Azul ​Resources, which is backed by Carnelian Energy Capital.

WSJ : Betaworks Scores With Hugging Face Deal John Borthwick’s venture firm wrot

Betaworks Scores With Hugging Face Deal
John Borthwick’s venture firm wrote the first check Hugging Face ever received, and now owns a stake that could be worth $650 million. Other early investors also did handsomely.

  • Nvidia is acquiring Hugging Face for close to $13 billion, including about $11.9 billion for stockholders.
  • Venture firm Betaworks holds a roughly 5.5% stake in Hugging Face, which is worth about $650 million at the acquisition price.
  • Betaworks initially invested a $150,000 check in Hugging Face during a 2016 accelerator program.

John Borthwick and his team at venture firm Betaworks picked Hugging Face as one of eight startups to join its 2016 accelerator among 450 applicants.

New York-based Betaworks wrote a $150,000 check to the company, which was developing a chatbot for teens at the time. Another $50,000 was syndicated to angel investors.

A decade later, Hugging Face, which pivoted to becoming a platform for open-weight AI models, announced it is being acquired by Nvidia for close to $13 billion, about $11.9 billion for stockholders and $1 billion in equity retention for employees.

John Borthwick, founder and CEO of Betaworks, standing with crossed arms at the NYSE podium with a gavel in the foreground in January of this year.
John Borthwick, founder and chief executive of Betaworks. Photo: NYSE
Betaworks invested in Hugging Face out of its $48 million first venture fund, and still owns a roughly 5.5% stake in the company, according to a person familiar with the situation. That translates to roughly $650 million at the acquisition price.

Two other early investors also hit a home run: A.Capital Ventures and SV Angel, firms run by brothers Ronny and Topher Conway, respectively. A.Capital said it could bag $1.5 billion on the sale of Hugging Face, while SV Angel estimates it could receive $312 million.

But part of Hugging Face’s early gestation occurred at Betaworks. Founded in 2008, Betaworks was originally a venture studio, where it incubated social-media startups, including TweetDeck and Giphy. In 2016, it raised its first venture fund and started its first accelerator program called “BotCamp,” focused on young startups creating chatbots using early natural-language-processing capabilities. At the time, many startups were building vertical chatbots, such as a weather bot or a finance bot.

Hugging Face’s founders, however, were going their own way. “They were insistent on doing a generalized experience,” said Borthwick, who is chief executive at Betaworks. “I was struck by that.”

The startup’s founders soon moved from Paris to join Betaworks in New York.

“Ten years ago to the day, I flew to NYC to work with Clem Delangue 🤗 at Betaworks,” Julien Chaumond, Hugging Face co-founder and chief technology officer, wrote in a post on LinkedIn last month, referring to his fellow co-founder and the startup’s chief executive. “We spent three weeks working together, almost day and night, from the Meatpacking District, in the NY 2016 summer heat,” he continued in the post, which included a picture of his British Airways boarding pass to the U.S.

They ended up working for a few months after the accelerator was over in Betaworks’ space.

That is where Terrence Rohan recalls meeting the founders. Now a managing director at Otherwise Fund, Rohan invested in Hugging Face’s seed round out of a small angel fund on behalf of Index Ventures, he said.

“Betaworks was a super important part of the early story,” Rohan said. “It’s an extraordinary return for them,” he added.

Borthwick, a champion of the New York tech scene, said that the deal “is a huge win for New York.”

At A.Capital, Ronny Conway, its founder and general partner, said in a letter to limited partners that his firm and SV Angel combined are Hugging Face’s largest outside shareholder.

A.Capital expects to receive $1.5 billion in proceeds, according to the letter, which comes to a 220 multiple on invested capital. The firm added that those figures are preliminary. A.Capital first invested in Hugging Face in 2018 out of its Fund II.

SV Angel estimated its proceeds would be $250 million for its SV Angel VI fund, generating a multiple on invested capital of 275 times. The firm first backed Hugging Face in 2016, with a $200,000 check. Additionally, SV Angel would get about $62 million via two of its other funds, per preliminary calculations, Topher Conway, a managing partner at the firm, wrote to the firm’s LPs.

Figures on A.Capital’s and SV Angel’s returns were first reported by Axios.

Other investors in Hugging Face include Lux Capital, Addition, Sequoia Capital, Salesforce Ventures, Coatue and Sound Ventures. Hugging Face raised close to $400 million over the years, and its latest private valuation was $4.5 billion, according to research firm PitchBook.

WSJ : The Poker Player, the Billionaire Aunt and a $5 Billion Real-Estate War Fo

The Poker Player, the Billionaire Aunt and a $5 Billion Real-Estate War
Four decades of bad blood and a family that simply can’t stop fighting lie beneath some of Manhattan’s most iconic buildings.

THERE ARE FEW THINGS these days that Jane Goldman and her nephew Steven see eye to eye on.

They don’t agree on who should manage the multibillion-dollar family real-estate business, or how they should do it. They don’t agree about the circumstances that led to the death of Steven Gurney-Goldman’s father, who died alone in a Russian hospital.

And they certainly don’t agree whether Steven blackmailed Jane in her Midtown Manhattan office about four years ago.

Jane is the only female billionaire in the U.S. running a real-estate business, according to Forbes. She has short brown hair, tortoiseshell glasses and an irreverent wit. She feigns outrage loudly, according to people who like her, and yells maniacally, according to people who don’t. By reputation she is a tough negotiator who cuts commercial tenants little slack for minor violations and refuses to give an inch when negotiating a lease. She gets away with it because the Goldman family has extensive holdings throughout New York City, including the land below some of its poshest properties, from the Gramercy Park Hotel to the Cartier Building on Fifth Avenue. Many ground leases—where tenants develop on Goldman land—run for 99 years.

Jane began managing the family company in 1987, when her own father died. For some of that time she worked with her brother, Steven’s father, Allan Goldman, at her side. (Aunt and nephew can’t even agree on this: It was a decade by Jane’s account, more than three decades—some from home—by Steven’s.)

By 2024, she was in her late 60s, sitting in the witness stand of a Delaware courtroom, recounting the way this nephew of hers was saying if Jane didn’t fork over a quarter of the business, he would share unflattering information with her older sister, Amy Goldman Fowler. “I’m going to tell Amy and you’re going to look very bad, and you don’t want that,” Steven allegedly said.

“What is it?” Jane wanted to know. The two sisters were already locked in a fight over the value of some company holdings. Did her nephew have information that could make life harder for Jane?

She wasn’t buying it. “He was a professional poker player for a while,” she said from the stand as Steven, who views poker as a hobby, looked on. “I think he was bluffing me, and he was trying to get me to agree.”

Later that day, on that very same witness stand, Steven testified he had received information from family employees that an appraisal to determine the worth of some company holdings was improperly conducted and that Jane had purposefully lowered it. And they’d spoken about how public lawsuits weren’t good for the estate. But threats or blackmail? “Ridiculous,” he testified.

After the trial wrapped for the day, Steven and Amy left the courthouse with Jane behind them. It was familiar territory for the Goldmans—the family has fought on and off for 40 years. This time, two generations were battling for the family’s legacy, the future of its real-estate empire and the billions at stake.

“Wait, one second,” Jane yelled. “Family picture!”

Nobody waited. And nobody laughed.

THE IRONY ABOUT very rich families fighting over money is that the battles are rarely about money. They are over power and control, legacy, sibling rivalry and the parental attention that money can’t buy. Members of the Goldman family had been fighting over money since the 1980s, lobbing accusations of cheating and fraud and mental illness.

By the time Steven (a third-generation Goldman) and his aunt Jane (a second-generation Goldman) began battling for the future of the family business, there was plenty of money and land and more than enough emotional baggage.

Jane’s father was the famed Sol Goldman, a scrappy Brooklyn grocer’s son who would at his height amass 1,900 properties across the city, including a stake in the Chrysler Building. Even as a teenager, he bought up foreclosed properties, borrowing $50 from the pharmacist, then the liquor store owner, until he had enough to purchase a $500 lot.

Sol named his business Solil—a combination of his own name and that of his wife, Lillian. He was known to drive a hard bargain. As legend has it, a buyer who owned buildings surrounding a Sol Goldman property once approached him. Sol told the buyer he wanted $20 million—even though the small building was worth a fraction of that. How can you possibly ask that, the buyer said.

“Because my name is Sol Goldman and my name is on the deed,” said Sol, the story goes. The buyer ponied up.

Sol was subtle about his wealth, says Raoul Felder, Sol’s friend and onetime divorce attorney. The lawyer recalls trying to convince Forbes to take Sol off the magazine’s list of the 400 richest Americans. “He always said, ‘Real estate is a quiet business,’” recalls Felder in an interview. “Then he held his finger up to his lips.” (Sol appeared on some lists during the 1980s.)

Less quiet were his familial battles. Before Sol died, his wife Lillian filed for divorce, accusing her husband of abuse and alleging he dangled her out the window of their 31st-floor suite at the Waldorf Astoria. (“An absolute damn lie,” testified Sol; Felder claims the window in question had been locked since 1931.)

When Sol died in 1987, he was thought to be the largest private landlord in New York City, with a billion-dollar estate to boot. After his death, Lillian fought in court with her four children, seeking what she viewed as her rightful portion of Sol’s wealth.

Jane and her siblings took their late father’s side, accusing their mother of being disloyal. The three daughters called their mother mentally ill; Allan did not.

“I love them very much,” Lillian told reporters of her kids, after a court hearing. “But I don’t like them.”


IN SOL’S LATER YEARS, Felder broached the question of succession. “I don’t mean to be sexist, but women don’t run real-estate businesses,” he recalls saying to the real-estate mogul. “You won’t live forever, so who will take over the business?”

“I have a son,” Sol retorted. “My son’s name is Jane.”

Jane remembers in her 20s spending seven days a week with her father: working at his office, spending weekends at his house, having dinner together every single night. In a deposition, a lawyer asks if she had any formal training in real estate.

“Yes, the best,” Jane says. What was it, the lawyer presses.

“Sol Goldman.”

Jane was 32 when Sol died.

He had named as co-executors of his estate Jane and her brother, Allan, plus charged Jane with appointing a third. Jane and Allan ran the business, consulting the other two siblings, Diane Goldman Kemper and Amy, on major decisions. Amy was a philanthropist and renowned gardener who had bonded with her father over the art of picking produce; Diane worked in the office doing residential leasing. Each of the four siblings held equal stakes in the business. But much of the structure was informal, with a lack of documentation about transferring a company between generations. It was, after all, all in the family.

Jane says that was how her father wanted it: “It was his hope—and at the time the other family members’ hope—to keep it together for ourselves and the future generations.”

Some who know Jane personally say she is sharp, witty and goes out of her way to connect friends with doctors, often through her cardiologist husband. She lives in a $25.5 million townhouse on the Upper East Side with her husband and her sister Diane, who has multiple sclerosis and requires 24-hour nursing care.

She has one home in the Hamptons, and another on Billionaires’ Row in Palm Beach, just south of Mar-a-Lago.

Her dry sense of humor at times confounds those around her. In one deposition, a lawyer for Steven asks whom she talked to prior to the questioning.

“My hairdresser,” she says. She had wanted to look good on video. The lawyer asks for her stylist’s name.

“His name is Sam. He moonlights as a lawyer too so he was prepping me,” says Jane, deadpan.

“Is that a true statement?” says Steven’s lawyer.

“It’s a joke,” Jane says.

Then there is the way people in the real-estate world describe Jane: a myth, mercurial, difficult, sharp elbowed. She can be hard to get a meeting with—except for a select few. When negotiating a deal she can be tough, short and take a my-way-or-the-highway approach.

“One of the incredible strengths that she has is to negotiate from a position of ‘I don’t care,’” says Gary Barnett, president of Extell Development, noting that she forces the other party to the max, almost as if the whole thing is a game.

“Almost every single deal I’ve done with her I’ve paid more than I thought I would,” Barnett adds. Because of her family wealth, she can afford to take an extreme position, and still sleep at night if she loses a deal, he says.

Her “no Mr. Nice Guy” approach to enforcing the terms of a lease is also within her rights, her defenders say.

“She gets a bad rap for being too tough,” says Tyler Morse, who in 2023 paid $50 million for a 99-year lease with Solil for the land beneath the Gramercy Park Hotel after Goldman foreclosed on the prior operator. “She strikes deals and she holds people to them.”

She learned from her father. Nearly four decades later, Jane still recites his mantras like gospel: Don’t sell. Don’t subordinate. Don’t use financing.

Today the company has very little debt.

IN 2013, Jane took on a new employee: her nephew. Steven, Allan’s only son, had just graduated from Vanderbilt University with a degree in political science.

On its face, they had little in common. She was well coiffed. He hadn’t realized he was rich until in public high school at Stuyvesant, where he favored ratty clothes, even in winter pairing gym shorts with a Jets hoodie so well worn he stuck his thumbs through holes in its cuffs. She flies in a private jet; friends say he flies coach.

She ran the business conservatively; he wanted to not only collect rent, but buy and develop properties.

At the time, Steven had been playing poker competitively, winning first place—and $29,342—in No Limit Hold ‘Em at the Hollywood Poker Open in 2015, and thousands in similar tournaments for years. “Steven had a knack for reading other people and adjusting the math based on what he saw other people were doing,” says Joe Blay, a longtime friend.

One thing Steven and his aunt had in common: Their love of real estate began with their fathers.

Allan, who was 47 and toward the end of his second marriage by the time Steven was born, got annoyed by errant balls that Steven didn’t get in his plastic Little Tikes hoop. He didn’t care about Steven’s devotion to learning the cello. What Allan really loved was real estate. So Steven, desperate to connect with his dad, tried to love real estate, too.

Allan, who was battling Parkinson’s at the time, was spending little time at the office. Steven brought his dad something he lacked: office intel. He knew who came into the office and what was going on. When his dad asked about tenants—”How are the Di Palos doing?,” he’d say of a famous Italian grocer—Steven knew the answer.


Jane didn’t think Steven did much—she tried to educate her nephew, a spokesman says, but he “accomplished nothing of note.” He thought he was modernizing the place, with his spokeswoman saying he implemented an online rent payment system, helped negotiate leases, explored development opportunities and cleared thousands of housing violations, successfully getting his father off a citywide worst landlord list.

By the time Steven left in 2020 to go to business school at Wharton, Jane said in a deposition, she hoped that Steven and her own son, Michael Lewis, who is a year his junior, would run the business one day.

Then two years later, the family suffered a major shake-up: On Jan. 15, Allan, a 78-year-old American billionaire, died alone in Russia’s Saint Petersburg’s City Hospital No. 40, Intensive Care Unit No. 3.

The family drama around his death wouldn’t become public until late 2022, when Steven filed a lawsuit against Natalia Vostrikova, the woman who spent more than 15 years by Allan’s side. (Steven refers to Natalia as a caretaker; people close to the family say she was a longtime partner.)

Natalia had said she had taken him to Russia to investigate a chain of clinics which advertised a new kind of stem-cell therapy. By that time, Allan couldn’t stand, walk or feed himself. But the longer they spent in Russia, the more suspicious Steven became of Natalia. “I am extremely concerned,” Steven typed on Jan. 14, 2022. “Please give me [an] update on my dad.”

Jane was suspicious too, but blamed Steven, who was Allan’s healthcare proxy. In her view, according to court documents, Steven and his sisters had ample chances to visit their father, and neglected to get involved. And now their father was dead.

(Steven’s spokeswoman says he and his sisters did everything in their power to come to his aid.)

Distraught, two generations of Goldmans came together, united around the common goal of bringing Allan’s body back home. His children had frantic emails and texts and calls. Jane successfully used her contacts at Fischer Travel, an ultraluxury membership-only agency, and around the chief rabbi of Moscow, to bring Allan home. About two weeks later, they held his funeral at Temple Emanu-El on the Upper East Side.

Years later, Steven and Natalia would settle the lawsuit. Natalia said in a court affidavit that she and Allan had been romantically involved since 2002, but hadn’t married due to the objections of his children. Allan received medical treatments in Russia but unfortunately nothing worked, she said.

After the funeral, Steven, the executor of his father’s estate, visited Jane at her office, hoping an in-person chat would make it easier to get the documents and funds he thought he needed to settle his father’s estate. Then, he later testified in court, he told Jane that if she was adding a fourth manager—or day-to-day operator—for a family holding company, he would be a good fit.

By Jane’s account, Steven asked to step into his father’s shoes and manage the business. She viewed Steven as too young, too inexperienced, too unprepared, she testified. She brought up her son, Michael, who had worked at Solil with Steven.

“I didn’t think either one of them were ready,” Jane said. “And my son would admit he wasn’t ready.”

THE LAW IS ill equipped to deal with the latent jealousy and hidden ambitions that lurk below the surface of inheritance disputes. Courts can divide up money and property and assess what agreements made in the past mean for the future. But when money means love and money means power, and one generation’s desire for legacy conflicts with another’s ambition, judges lack the tools to settle anything at all.

Steven, now 35 and married to his high school sweetheart with a toddler, is a partner at Arena Capital, a small real-estate private-equity firm that invests in the Hudson Valley. He rolls up his sleeves, says a colleague, negotiating boiler repairs and driving six hours round-trip to close a deal to earn $12,000 a year in rent. He has largely traded his poker-playing days for the strategy board game Catan, and was a champion at the game’s elite master’s tournament last year. The strategies are familiar: building alliances, gathering resources, using leverage and diplomacy—all skills one can use in business.

In real life, one of his allies is his other aunt Amy. After Allan died, a legal dispute between Amy and Jane was brewing. Amy had wanted to cash out a small portion of her share in the company: more than $125 million, by her analysis, and $91 million, by Jane’s. They were arguing over whether an appraisal had undervalued company holdings.

“I’m going to spend millions and millions of dollars to fight you in court,’” Jane said during one blowup, according to Amy. Jane, screaming, then slammed the door. (Jane has called Amy’s account of this conversation “a complete lie.”)

Amy Goldman Fowler attends The Orchid Dinner.
Amy Goldman Fowler. Dominik Bindl/Getty Images
Steven and Amy sued Jane in Delaware, and, alongside Steven’s sisters, filed a lawsuit in New York. They argued Jane, now 71, forced through a flawed appraisal that improperly undervalued some company holdings by more than a half-billion dollars.

“In what is best described as a real-life parallel to the television show Succession, Defendant Jane Goldman has engaged in a brazen and illegal scheme to wrest control of the largest privately owned real-estate empire in New York City from her family members,” the complaint began.

“The comparison fits in one respect: Both are works of fiction,” Jane’s lawyer fired back. Of the appraisal, her lawyer told the court, “There’s not a stitch of evidence she did anything wrong.” A judge hasn’t ruled on the matter.

Things got personal. Amy wrote in her diary, which appeared in court filings, that Jane’s daughter Solina—named after the family patriarch—told her that Jane had said she “wanted to kill [Steven] or else hire a contract killer.” (Jane’s spokesman said: “Jane has absolutely no recollection of saying this or anything similar. And if she ever did, it obviously would’ve been in jest.”)

Steven had said that, during a break in deposition proceedings, Jane screamed at him and referred to him winding up dead. Steven said he was shocked: “I don’t honestly remember exactly what she said.”

Jane’s lawyer asked pointedly, “You didn’t hear her telling you that you lied, and that if you believed in God, karma would come back to you?”

When Jane was deposed, she brought Allan’s autopsy report—and pictures of his dead body. “I want to make sure the pictures are entered,” she said.

In the wake of what they view as Jane’s power grab, Steven and Amy see a scenario in which they are willing to split up the empire, much like Sol once did.

After Sol’s business partner died of a heart attack while sitting at his Chrysler Building desk, he and his partner’s son flipped coins to divvy up envelopes with dozens of properties. But Jane, who enters her office to an oil painting of her father, smiling kindly in a maroon armchair, is confident that Sol would have wanted his holdings intact for generations to come.

Unless the family settles, the legal battles could run on for years—the Delaware case is over but litigation in New York continues, both in a trial court and Surrogate’s court. These days, Steven rarely sets foot at the family office.

Meanwhile, family members are still making moves: Jane stepped down in late July as a manager of a key family holding company. Michael, 34, has taken her place. Michael had left asset-manager Blackstone and began working at the family business last year, according to people familiar with the matter.

To add insult to injury: Jane didn’t even bother telling Steven.