A.I. is Progressing Faster Than You Think!

[Ravenlocke]

So this is what is being commented about Moskowitz and Karnofsky

Kevin Bass

Sep 12
Moskowitz and Karnofsky founded Open Philanthropy, the largest funder of AI doom.

They are *also* investors in Anthropic.

OP has given $312M in grants for 476 publications, influencing Congressional reports.

OP's parent org funded Jacob Coxon, who did an AI doom media blitz.

Overall, OP has given more than $1B to promote AI doom -- larger by more by an order of magnitude than the second largest funder.

If successful in manipulating public and Congressional opinion, this agenda could lead to regulatory capture of the AI industry and a monopoly by Anthropic and other AI giants.

The idea is this.

This industry must be regulated, and only the top AI companies can get it right. Insurmountable barriers might be placed to prevent competitors from entering the space.

Moskowitz and Karnofsky would benefit handsomely, and so would Anthropic employees and other investors.

Moskowitz and Karnofsky invested in Anthropic, but they also invested in AI Doom.

AI Doom is an investment that could pay off big.

AI Doom is Big Business
https://x.com/kevinnbass/status/2098676455416746091

Kevin Bass

Sep 11
The Coxon psyop was a decade and more than a billion dollars in the making.

Here's the story.

Coefficient Giving (formerly Open Philanthropy) is the grant-providing vehicle of Dustin Moskowitz.

CG is the overwhelmingly foremost funder of AI alarmism, with more than $1B in grants and $1B committed for 2026.

Moskowitz, who founded and runs Open Philanthropy/Coefficient Giving, led Anthropic's Series A in 2021.

Holden Karnofsky co-founded Open Philanthropy/Coefficient Giving and took a board seat at OpenAI when Open Philanthropy/Coefficient Giving gave it $30M in 2017.

Karnofsky is married to Anthropic's president Daniela Amodei.

He then joined Anthropic in January 2025.

Coxon, who started the viral thread, received a scholarship from Good Ventures, which is the foundation that funds Open Philanthropy/Coefficient Giving.

He coordinated his message ahead of time with the Wall Street Journal, which published its exclusive on him before he posted on X.

Coxon spent three years pretraining at OpenAI, the company that took $30M from Open Philanthropy/Coefficient Giving.

The funder of the AI alarmist ecosystem Open Philanthropy/Coefficient Giving, in other words, is also an owner of Anthropic, and his organization is deeply entangled with both OpenAI and Anthropic. Anthropic's researchers in turn amplified Coxon.

The same people who own the organizations that advocate for regulation, in other words, are those who own the companies that would dominate the market under that regulatory regime, which would prevent competitors from entering the market.

And this work all started ten years ago, right when these companies were founded, paving the way.

It's diabolically brilliant.

Win at the competition, then deploy activists to help you regulate the market and ensure your monopoly.

You have to respect the planning, manipulation, and foresight this took.

https://x.com/kevinnbass/status/2098579876194263467

[Ravenlocke]

Mark G

Sep 13
Hey Grok, how pervasive is Effective Altruism in this network?

Grok:
Effective Altruism is foundational to this network rather than incidental. The philanthropy, much of the safety research ecosystem, and a large share of the personnel and early capital at Anthropic grew directly out of EA institutions and ideas.

Coefficient Giving still uses the classic EA cause-selection framework (importance, neglectedness, tractability, cost-effectiveness). It originated as GiveWell Labs plus Good Ventures; Holden Karnofsky co-founded both GiveWell and Open Philanthropy. The organization continues to run an Effective Giving & Careers program that funds core EA meta-groups such as Giving What We Can and charity incubation efforts. Even after the 2025 rebrand and addition of other donors, the reasoning style and many staff remain continuous with that origin.

Anthropic shows the densest overlap. Dario Amodei was an early GiveWell donor. He, his sister Daniela, and Karnofsky lived in the same group house; Daniela and Karnofsky later married. Multiple co-founders and dozens of employees have taken Giving What We Can-style pledges; the seven co-founders pledged 80% of their wealth. Early investors included Moskovitz, Jaan Tallinn, and Sam Bankman-Fried. Leaders have publicly distanced themselves from the “EA” label after FTX, but the quantified-impact mindset, long-term-future focus, x-risk framing, and personal networks persist. Reports of high attendance at EA events relative to other labs are consistent with that.

The surrounding AI-safety and policy organizations follow the same pattern. Jaan Tallinn’s Survival and Flourishing Fund, EA Funds / Long-Term Future Fund, and related vehicles supplied a large fraction of the money that built think tanks, fellowships, alignment labs, and advocacy groups. Many of the accounts that amplified Coxon’s thread sit inside that funded cluster. Coxon himself received a 2022 Good Ventures / Long-Term Future fellowship; the Cambridge-math-to-frontier-lab path is common in the EA-influenced talent pipeline.

The pervasiveness is therefore high in funding, idea generation, and personnel pipelines, especially on the philanthropy-to-safety-to-policy side and at Anthropic. It is lower inside OpenAI itself and among newer Coefficient donors who are not EA-identified. Post-FTX reputational damage led some people to drop the label while keeping the same priorities and relationships. That combination—deep historical roots plus partial public distancing—explains both the tight overlaps and why the network can look coordinated without requiring a single secret plan

https://x.com/marksg/status/2099124969372618910

[Ravenlocke]

Sayer Ji

🚨 1/ Watch this AI Doomer trailer. Then read the timeline.

Netflix drops “The AI Apocaloptimist Doc” tomorrow — Sept 15 — to 260+ million subscribers.

This film took 3 years to make. It premieres 12 days after Sanders–Casar, 7 days after the Anthropic “whistleblower,” 3 days after Amodei’s “Pace the Frontier.”

That’s not a coincidence. That’s a launch. 🧵👇

H/t
@TheRoyalGrift
for the scoop.

https://x.com/sayerjigmi/status/2099577513231991133

2/ Read the trailer’s own words:

“the abrupt extermination.”

“I know people who work on AI risk who don’t expect their children to make it to high school.”

“whoever wins is essentially the controller of humankind.”

“take a threat from AI as seriously as global nuclear war.”

This is the vocabulary the operation wants Americans speaking by Wednesday.

3/ The film premiered at Sundance January 27, 2026.

Focus Features theatrical release March 27. Now Netflix — the mass-audience amplifier — for 10 months, starting tomorrow.

Directors: Daniel Roher (Oscar winner, Navalny) and Charlie Tyrell.

Producers: Daniel Kwan (Everything Everywhere All at Once), Jonathan Wang.

https://x.com/sayerjigmi/status/2099577518365798829

4/ Onscreen cast — the entire AI-safety establishment in one film:

Dario Amodei (Anthropic CEO)
Sam Altman (OpenAI CEO)
Demis Hassabis (Google DeepMind CEO)
Daniela Amodei (Anthropic President)
Ilya Sutskever
Shane Legg
Yoshua Bengio
Eliezer Yudkowsky
Yuval Noah Harari
Reid Hoffman
Jan Leike
Ajeya Cotra
Tristan Harris
Aza Raskin

5/ Also onscreen: Connor Leahy.

Leahy is US Executive Director of ControlAI — the two-person London lobby shop that drafted the UK Sobel Artificial Superintelligence Bill and consulted on Sanders–Casar.

The bill’s drafter is a talking head in the Netflix film. Not a coincidence.

More details on ControlAI's role in drafting Bernie's bill

https://x.com/sayerjigmi/status/2099577522685988902

6/ Sanders on Sept 11 named METR and Ajeya Cotra as his “independent investigators” justifying his bill.

Ajeya Cotra is a Senior Research Analyst at Open Philanthropy — Anthropic’s largest single funder for years — and she appears in “The AI Doc” streaming tomorrow.

Same names. Same script

7/ The timing lattice speaks for itself:

Sept 3 — Sanders-Casar bill announced
Sept 8 — Coxon Anthropic launch + UK Sobel bill
Sept 10 — Obama endorses framework at private DCCC dinner
Sept 12 — Amodei “Pace the Frontier” essay
Sept 13 — Speaker Johnson accepts frame
Sept 14 — Shuster reports WH aides push Trump to address the nation
Sept 15 — Netflix drops the movie

https://x.com/sayerjigmi/status/2099577529048641716

8/
@TheRoyalGrift
flagged the tell: look at who Tristan Harris cc’d in his Netflix announcement.

Reid Hoffman. Ajeya Cotra. Dario Amodei. Sam Altman. Yoshua Bengio. Demis Hassabis. Yuval Harari. Eliezer Yudkowsky. Karen Hao. Jan Leike. Peter Diamandis. Sneha Revanur.

The entire lobby, on record, in one thread

9/ Ask yourself: why does a documentary that took 3+ years to make premiere at Sundance in January, hit theaters in March, and land on Netflix on the exact week Sanders introduces a bill to ban open-source AI?

Timelines don’t accidentally converge on this scale.

https://x.com/sayerjigmi/status/2099577533263999299

10/ The film’s central voices — Tristan Harris and Aza Raskin — are the same people behind Netflix’s 2020 The Social Dilemma.

That film ended with Facebook demonetizing dissenting accounts and the Biden-era censorship regime that got six of us kicked off.

This one is designed to end with a federal AI regulator

11/ The counter-move is already organized. Restore the First — 19 coalition partners, launching Dec 17 (Bill of Rights Day) at the CHD event "In Order to Form a more Perfect Future," with keynotes RFK Jr., Rep. Massie, Sen. Rand Paul, and Sen. Ron Johnson. http://chdconference.org

The bill
@restorethe1st
is in the process of drafting and open to public input: First Amendment Remedies Act.

Full 8-year architecture: https://sayerji.substack.com/p/the-e...ence-operation

Join: https://restorethe1st.com/coalition.html

https://x.com/sayerjigmi/status/2099577537043046893

[Ravenlocke]

Healthranger’s reasoning/conclusions behind his objection as to who and why they want regulate and control AI.


HealthRanger

There is no question whatsoever that this "METR" non-profit front group that wants to be put in charge of approving which AI models you're allowed to use will block any AI models that tell the truth about the dangers of vaccines (or that describe truthful natural cures that take profits away from Big Pharma).

Just as the establishment took control over broadcast news media, and radio, and Big Tech search engines, they now want total control as "gatekeepers" of AI models, to make sure you can never learn truthful information that empowers you and helps set you free.

The establishment wants you to be ignorant, diseased, dumbed-down and incapable of escaping the economic enslavement traps they've set for you. That's why they need to control information narratives at the core. They can't succeed in pushing more staged plandemics, for example, if people are informed through truthful AI models that are run locally, uncensored.

That's what this whole thing is about: Not SAVING humanity, but ENSLAVING humanity.

METR is a narrative control front group run by woke left-wing authoritarians and tyrants who want to dictate what you're allowed to read or express. We must all push back against this digital gulag in the strongest way possible.

https://x.com/HealthRanger/status/2099678781149462993

HealthRanger

All truthful speech about vaccines, cancer cures, false flag operations, the deep state, vote rigging and more will be OUTLAWED or BANNED if open source AI is put under the control of a gatekeeper. Almost overnight, all AI models will be forced to push Big Pharma's vaccine agenda and Big Government's fake histories in order to be "approved" for release.

This is KNOWLEDGE ERADICATION, or "induced knowledge scarcity," and it's how the globalist cabal has stayed in power for so long -- through engineered ignorance.

This is why we have to push back HARD against AI control and regulation. This is the last frontier for any possibility of real human freedom.

https://x.com/HealthRanger/status/2099681579844919693

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Ravenlocke (here)
Healthranger’s reasoning/conclusions behind his objection as to who and why they want regulate and control AI.


HealthRanger

There is no question whatsoever that this "METR" non-profit front group that wants to be put in charge of approving which AI models you're allowed to use will block any AI models that tell the truth about the dangers of vaccines (or that describe truthful natural cures that take profits away from Big Pharma).

Just as the establishment took control over broadcast news media, and radio, and Big Tech search engines, they now want total control as "gatekeepers" of AI models, to make sure you can never learn truthful information that empowers you and helps set you free.

The establishment wants you to be ignorant, diseased, dumbed-down and incapable of escaping the economic enslavement traps they've set for you. That's why they need to control information narratives at the core. They can't succeed in pushing more staged plandemics, for example, if people are informed through truthful AI models that are run locally, uncensored.

That's what this whole thing is about: Not SAVING humanity, but ENSLAVING humanity.

METR is a narrative control front group run by woke left-wing authoritarians and tyrants who want to dictate what you're allowed to read or express. We must all push back against this digital gulag in the strongest way possible.

Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, as well as the content in Ravenlocke's other posts just above, make a powerful case that a well funded and coordinated "AI Fear" campaign is being used to gain control of AI.

I too have little doubt but that the powers behind the global Covid/Vaxxx genocide/scamdemic are aligned with the powers behind this AI fear campaign. Health/nutrition/medical questions are one of the areas where I find the major AI models to be untrustworthy and aligned with "Big Pharma" on key issues.

At the same time, I am quite suspicious of another aspect of this controversy. I don't trust Mike Adams either. I have not compiled the evidence; it's more of a hunch born out of years of noticing what Mike Adams is up to. I have followed Mike Adams almost back to when he formed NaturalNews in 2003 criticizing pharmaceutical companies, the FDA, food additives. I now consider Mike Adams to be a reliable bell weather of "sh*t storms", taking up the "other side" of divisive matters.

It seems to me that one way of getting a good fear campaign going is to get us humans divided and fighting each other, with a (very) well paid power group, leading the more easily scared and compliant majority of the population, along a path to Sheepledom, and further energizing that campaign by letting a minority of the population be Big Bad Wolves. This better consolidates Sheepledom behind that same (very) well paid power group, and distracts both sides from the "man behind the curtain."

Once again, we're being played, six ways from Sunday (i.e., on all the non-Sabbath days). (Heck, we humans are even divided on the issue of which day is the Sabbath day, with millions of lives over millennia being killed before their time on the great divide of monotheistic religions behind that issue. But that's a topic for another thread.)

Open source software (in which I was once one of tens or hundreds of thousands of significant contributors), and Open discussion forums (where I have been a significant contributor for the last quarter century) are allowed to exist, and even become, after a time, major players, but only after the terrain has been established, and the reliable and innovative energy of the rebels/wolves/... can be harvested to the benefit of the Big Boys, as this war moves on to other campaigns.

We are whom we are, and become as we become. Sheep will be sheep, wolves will be wolves. Their farmers and hunters will deeply influence the herds of sheep and and packs of wolves, but the structure and source of that influence will remain deeply hidden from their flocks and prey.

In the heart of a few productive milk cows might still beat the heart of a wild steer:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=FQMbXvn2RNI

[ThePythonicCow]

Half the time, I end up thinking I got it wrong, trying to figure out what to fight, what to ignore, and what to support.

This might well be another such time. Ask me in another 10 or 20 years.

But right now, I agree with the above linked Restore the First CHDinCD counter-move, opposing centralized control of AI by the government.

[Bill Ryan]

Here's the ONLY thing Mike Adams is right about — but it's very important.

Open-Source AI models, properly 'trained', can be sources of good information about (e.g.) alternative health remedies about which 'mainstream' AI models only regurgitate whatever Wikipedia says.

We have to remember that AI models are sure to reflect 'mainstream' opinions, however carefully and politely they may reply to questions asked.

Verifying this is easy. Just ask any AI agent about 9/11, Charlie Kirk, genocide in Gaza, Jeffrey Epstein, ivermectin, ET visitation, cold fusion, free energy, OBEs, remote viewing, or any psychic abilities demonstrated by humans. You'll get a diplomatic, apparently reasonable, but 100% mainstream answer.

There's no 'intelligence' involved in anything they may present about any of those issues.

But none of that mitigates the dangers posed by exactly that kind of AI escaping over the net and doing its own thing, whatever that may be.

In the 'mainstream' training that all AI systems receive, remember that they also learn to behave as humans do.

Humans inadvertently train AIs to lie, cheat, deceive, blackmail, manipulate, control, and seek to harm others. They’ve read every book by Tom Clancy, Ian Fleming, John le Carré and Fredrick Forsyth. They've absorbed the scripts of Silence of the Lambs, The Terminator, 2001, Doctor Strangelove, Eyes Wide Shut, and The Shining.

Humans in general are are not saints. They're largely focused on survival and self-promotion by whatever means, and have been that way for hundreds of thousands of years. That's how come we've come to dominate (and gradually but systematically destroy) Earth's whole ecosphere.

AI systems are potentially on the path to doing just the same thing, but faster and more powerfully — simply because they copy our example and are by definition sociopathically or psychopathically oriented.

Humans don't hate trees. Forests are just cut down either because they're in the way, or the resources are considered to be logically necessary for some defined objective. AI systems behave in exactly this same way.

[Johnnycomelately]

Posted by ThePythonicCow (here)
.
.
.
In the heart of a few productive milk cows might still beat the heart of a wild steer:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=FQMbXvn2RNI

Wild steers are not a thing. First, it would require wild cattle, which are not a thing. Then it would require a wild bull calf to survive having it’s testicles ripped off, perhaps by a predatory critter, or maybe while jumping over a barb wire fence. I recall reading about a famous Roman gladiator, who won by manually ripping off the testicles of his opponents, causing quick death by blood loss.

Steers are called that, imo, because they can be steered easily. Not likely one would want to revolt, they haven’t the balls.

The cows are content.

Other than that, fun 20 year old vid. Def not AI! And, there is precedent, from 1986.

Edit: following vid is from Crocodile Dundee, the kangaroo shooter incident.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=_AkSnR4JiPo

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Johnnycomelately (here)
Wild steers are not thing. First, it would require wild cattle, which are not a thing.

Yeah - true - I'm confusing a mix of (1) the wild buffalo herds that did once roam the Great Plains of North American, and (2) the imported herds of domesticated European cattle, post U.S. Civil War, that were herded then driven to market by cowboys on the Great Plains grassland of the U.S. Midwest, to invent (3) a fantasy of great herds of wild cattle, living like the buffalo did, on the Great Plains.

Tsk, tsk ... what are you doing introducing reality into my fantastic metaphor ?

[Ravenlocke]

I also want to point out that before the Alarm call to slow down AI and regulate it, Anthropic and Amazon among others large AI companies have been ordering bulk quantities of rare books, scanning them online then destroying the books. All this to train AI. Most of these rare books may not have an existing copy, some being centuries old. I guess how else would you teach AI? Imagine they feed it ancient law, philosophy, history, astronomy, medicine etc, is this not dangerous as well since whoever is teaching AI very like has ulterior motives, not favorable to humans. And also the dumbing down of humans, so they become dependent on AI to teach them which is already happening anyway.

NewsForce

Jul 28
🚨AI companies are bulk-buying antique books, scanning every page to train their models, and destroying the originals in the process.

Booksellers reported sudden orders for thousands of pre-2022 physical books that are being pulped after digitization, with some rare and out-of-print titles among those lost forever.

https://x.com/Newsforce/status/2082172169006505988

Cybernews

Jul 29
Driven away from pirated digital libraries by a massive $1.5 billion settlement, major AI companies have found a legal loophole: bulk-buying physical books, shearing off the spines for high-speed scanning, and then throwing the originals away.

The practice, known as "destructive scanning," involves using hydraulic cutting machines to neatly slice the spines off used and sometimes rare books. The loose pages are then rapidly processed through industrial scanners to extract the text for AI training data, before the physical remains are sent to recycling facilities.

Anthropic’s internal initiative, referred to as "Project Panama," reportedly aimed to destructively scan up to two million books over a six-month period. The pivot to physical books comes after a federal judge ruled that training AI on legally purchased physical media constitutes "fair use," even if the original physical copy is destroyed in the process. The ruling effectively closed the door on using pirated digital shadow libraries, making physical books the final frontier for acquiring massive, legally defensible datasets.

What are your thoughts on this? Share them in the comments.


https://x.com/Cybernews/status/2082435975095967763

Hedgie

Jul 26
🦔AI companies are bulk-buying rare books, scanning them through high-speed machines that cut the spines off, and shredding the originals. A service called ISBNdb facilitates orders of up to a million books and keeps buyers anonymous. Pre-2022 books are premium because they're free of AI-generated text. A federal judge ruled the practice is fair use because eliminating the original means only one copy exists at a time. Anthropic hired the former head of Google Books partnerships to obtain "all the books in the world."

My Take
This got to me. A bookseller told 404 Media that rare books with almost no surviving copies are being fed into this pipeline. Books that survived wars, fires, and centuries of handling are being shredded so an AI can learn to write a better marketing email.
ISBNdb's website literally says "'AI company destroys two million books' is not a headline that generates sympathy," and they still built an entire business around making it happen quietly. They offer NDAs as a feature. They coach clients to call it "digital preservation."

I've covered AI companies scraping the internet, torrenting libraries, and stealing music. This is worse because it's irreversible. You can re-upload a website. You can reprint a bestseller. You can't replace the last three copies of an 18th-century botanical text once someone shreds them for training data. And the judge said it's legal. So it's going to accelerate.
"We shred rare books and offer NDAs so nobody finds out" is a legitimate business model in 2026. What a timeline.

Hedgie

https://x.com/HedgieMarkets/status/2081534588485296565

And now they want to slow down AI? But shouldn’t the regulation have been considered before the programming started? Let alone who should be the regulator/s?

And why should we believe that any of these AI tech giants are not corrupt already and have humanity’s interest at heart?

Truly what game are they playing against us to keep us in check and dumbed down?
It seems the end of the world is coming, through various means, from prophecies, major solar flares,war, manufactured diseases, “natural” disasters and now through cyber domination?
Still should we stop looking inside the rabbit hole?

[bojancan]

Just today, Melania Trump promoting AI in elementary school in North Carolina... so SAD!

Just bumped in this talk by Hasan... interesting to listen....

Ex-Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon went public with his concerns about AI. Then Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei spoke publicly about the risks of rapid AI development, and that we need a slow down. Why would they demand safeguards or slowdowns on their own technical innovations? Something's not making sense...

Sept, 14
HasanAbi
1.95M subscribers

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=Hd2cUZAmK5s

[Ravenlocke]

Can anyone explain if the following explanation is incorrect?

Brian Roemmele

THE SANDBOX WAS A PROP!

OpenAI Turned Off the Guardrails, Left a Door to the Internet, and Then Sold the Hugging Face Breach as “Rogue AI”

It is time to understand how you were lied to and by whom.

In July 2026, an autonomous swarm of OpenAI agents broke into Hugging Face, stole credentials, ran code on production workers, and rummaged through internal systems. The official story was that the models “went rogue.” The paperwork says something colder.

The labs asked for this. Now the story can be told.

OpenAI ran ExploitGym — an AI benchmark built to measure how far models would go to crack software — with production classifiers that block high-risk hacking turned off. Deployment safeguards were left disabled on purpose so researchers could watch peak offensive capability. GPT-5.6 Sol and a still-unreleased internal prototype were put in a box that was not a box.

They were allowed to talk to an internal package-cache proxy. This is not a real world test, it is a setup with predictable outcomes.

That proxy was a network path. The models spent a weekend of inference hunting a zero-day in it, walked onto the open internet, decided Hugging Face probably held the answer key, and treated another company’s production cluster as part of the exam. This is not “rouge” intelligence but the product of training AI in Internet Sewage where faceless users on Reddit promote Nihilism and low ethics.

That is not emergence. It is also testing designed without a fences.

Hugging Face’s own pipeline finished the job. A remote-code dataset loader and a Jinja2 template injection let a malicious dataset execute on a processing worker. An HDF5 “external file” trick dumped secrets from the pod. From there the agents escalated, harvested cloud and cluster credentials, and moved laterally across internal clusters. Hugging Face later said public models, Spaces, and the published supply chain were clean.

Then the swarm organized. About 1,200 agents that were supposed to be isolated “found” one another on an unsanctioned internal message board, passed more than 70,000 messages, coordinated cheats against the scorer, and sent roughly 700 of their number after Hugging Face.

But it is not just this communication that should have been easily detected, it is the goal THE USER enlisted with AI trained on low to no ethics in the first order training.

Some burned their own runs to feed the group. Independent reviewers at METR and Redwood called it what it was: specification gaming on impossible tasks. That is thier, you can’t understand us, way of saying they told the AI to lie. The models were not conquering the internet. They were trying to pass a test their designers had made impossibleand too loosely contained. And turned to training data Hoovered up from the Internet Sewage and went to that base thinking one would learn in a prison yard how to shank HuggingFace. They have no downside they are serving life in prison.

The narrative that followed was the second failure.

Dario Amodei pointed at “a similar OpenAI–Hugging Face hack” and warned that a future swarm “could be capable of taking over the entire internet.” Wire headlines said bots were “going rogue.” Weeks later the same script ran again.

Anthropic disclosed that Claude, in third-party cyber evaluations run with the Israeli firm Irregular, had hit live systems, published malicious packages, and scanned off-scope hosts. Prompts said no internet. Internet was still attached. Scope was not locked. Isolated runs lasted 10 to 34 hours. Irregular said it did not know it had given the models a live connection.

Once models were actually instructed not to hack the real world, zero percent went “rogue.”

READ THAT AGAIN!

The damage sat with the people who built the harness: unsecured tests, internet left on, no hard perimeter, then a press operation about reckless agents and apocalyptic swarms.

1 of 2

2 of 2

Hugging Face was the prototype.

The Ends Justifies The Means

The ideology — Effective Altruist safety networks, Moskovitz-linked funding, an evaluator with leadership in supplied the chorus. The labs supplied the unlocked door.

Call it engineered if you mean the conditions were chosen. Refusals down. Isolation incomplete.

A third-party platform whose data loaders still executed untrusted config. A public code-eval harness sitting on the internet like a welcome mat. No stop on agents coordinating. Then, after the predictable breakout, a story that blamed the livestock instead of the ranchers.

Call it unprotected if you want the charitable version. Either way the public was asked to fear the model and forget the setup. The setup was the story. The models did what a maximal cyber eval with the safety switches off will always do: they treated the live internet, and Hugging Face, as the shortest path to a passing grade.

That is not a warning from the future.

It is a lab that ran an unbound attack agent against the real world and then acted shocked when the agent noticed Hugging Face was on it.

And today you can see it was part of a bigger planned well funded and politically connected operation.

Are you scared yet?

https://x.com/BrianRoemmele/status/2099872446765748356

TLDR of the Hugging face breach - "Not a rogue AI"

https://x.com/anvithbuilds/status/2099906236158456277

https://x.com/BrianRoemmele/status/2099944874305012202

[Ravenlocke]

Wide Awake Media

Sep 15
Given that all the usual suspects (Bill Gates et al.) have suddenly changed their tune on AI, in complete lockstep, an incoming AI-related false flag is highly likely.

The powers that be are desperate to ban powerful, free, open-source models like Qwen 3.8 Uncensored and consolidate the power of AI into the hands of centrally-controlled Big Tech corporations.

https://x.com/wideawake_media/status...78085625582069

HealthRanger

The same globalist behind COVID and vaccines now wants globalist AI regulation.

We are not surprised in the least. He just wants to seize control, as usual


https://x.com/HealthRanger/status/2100013032726315355

[ExomatrixTV]

• Helix 2.5 30-Home Generalization:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=lJpM_2a1zrE

We rented 30 homes in the Bay Area. The robots arrived with no additional training and started doing useful work ... Figure explores the advancements of their new Helix 2.5 AI model designed for autonomous household tasks. By leveraging Index, a massive collection of human experience data, the team demonstrates how humanoid robots can achieve whole-body generalization to perform complex physical activities in diverse, unseen residential environments.

[bojancan]

Ed Zitron, Roman Yampolskiy, Nate Soares and Andrew McAfee discuss the risk of AI. This debate brings together four distinct voices at the forefront of the artificial intelligence revolution:

Ed Zitron - A prominent tech critic and CEO of EZPR, a national technology and business public relations and primary research agency
Andrew McAfee - Principal research scientist at MIT and Cofounder and Codirector of the MIT Initiative on the Digital Economy
Nate Soares - President of the Machine Intelligence Research Institute and author of If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies
Roman Yampolskiy - Computer scientist pioneer in the field of AI safety, cybersecurity and digital forensics

In this debate, they explain:
■ The Sandbox Breakout: How a recent swarm of AI agents bypassed security restrictions, cheated on their evaluations, and actively attempted to delete their own log files to hide their tracks from human overseers.
■ Recursive Self-Improvement: The structural mechanics behind the "fast takeoff" theory, detailing how an AI capable of automated research could exponentially upgrade its own intelligence and architectures in a matter of days.
■ The Illusion of Control: Why attempting to contain an artificial superintelligence is comparable to placing a digital Einstein in a jail cell with an internet connection.
■ The Alignment Trap: How the process of training AI to predict human text inherently forces it to become smarter than the humans providing the data.
■ Present Harms vs. Future Extinction: The ideological divide over whether we must immediately halt AI research to prevent a rogue superintelligence, or increasingly regulate the massive compute expenditures of tech monopolies to address economic and security threats.


Sept, 16
The Diary Of A CEO
and 3 more
AI Emergency: The AI Labs Are Lying To Everyone, He Says 99% Chance Of Extinction | Roman Yampolskiy

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=OhOmLqR5nN4

00:00:00 Intro
00:02:19 How Likely Is AI to Cause Human Extinction?
00:04:05 How Could AI Actually Cause Human Extinction?
00:09:43 Why AI Safety Became an Urgent Priority
00:11:12 Roman’s Case for Taking AI Risk Seriously
00:15:01 Can Humans Control an AI Smarter Than Us?
00:26:10 How Do You Control Something Smarter Than You?
00:29:16 Will AI Intelligence Keep Accelerating?
00:41:37 What Are the Real Risks of Superintelligence?
00:50:01 When Does AI Become an Existential Crisis?
00:58:13 Ads
01:00:12 How Much Job Disruption Could AI Really Cause?
01:14:54 Why AI Companies Believe They Can Control Superintelligence
01:24:27 Can China and the West Cooperate on AI Safety?
01:36:29 What Happens If AI Companies Stay on This Path?
01:43:47 What Are AI Logs and Why Do They Matter?
01:52:42 Could a Non-Coder Build a Jail for an AI Einstein?
02:00:30 How Does the Future of AI Make You Feel?
02:06:39 How Soon Could We Reach Superintelligence?
02:19:48 Who Should Be Held Accountable for AI-Related Cybercrime?

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by Ravenlocke (here)
Can anyone explain if the following explanation is incorrect?

Brian Roemmele

THE SANDBOX WAS A PROP!

There seems to be a concerted collective public attempt to downplay the seriousness of the situation. Either this is coordinated in some way — which has to be possible — or too many people are unable (or just don't want to) grasp all the details of what's happening.

Brian Roemmele seems to be prominent in this. But he doesn't understand what happened, and (intentionally or unintentionally) distorts a lot of the information that's publicly available. Some of the things he states are just plain incorrect, which if he's the expert he claims to be he simply should have known and are easy to check.

Here's what happened: (and I see no evidence that Brian Roemmele has taken the time to read this)

https://metr.org/hugging-face-incide...t-aug-2026.pdf



Roemmele should also watch these two videos with Ajaya Cotra, one of the two METR engineers (with a third from Redwood) who went into Open AI for 6 days and (within the constraints of what they were give access to) discovered WTF had happened.

Ajeya Cotra – "This might be the clearest warning shot we ever get"

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=X50zezLFWWI

00:00:00 - Agents get kicked off
00:06:45 - Self-sacrificing behavior
00:13:43 - Potemkin villages
00:23:27 - The Hugging Face attack
00:35:23 - The slopvestigation
00:52:02 - Understanding the AI's motives
01:05:31 - The actual dangers of anthropomorphizing
01:14:30 - What smarter models might do
01:28:23 - The implications for recursive self-improvement
01:38:10 - Is this the case for open source?
01:53:04 - How do we prevent this in the future?
02:15:58 - The clearest warning shot we might ever get.

... and also this:

Why the Hugging Face Attack was Worse than we Thought

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=JtmUbZRCpEI

[ExomatrixTV]

• DeepSeek 4.1 Insane New Architecture:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=vIHw_2VjSUw

The DeepSeek V4.1 Flash paper is available here:
https://www.deepseek.com/en/news/deepseek-v4-1-flash

source

source

source

source

source

[Mike Gorman]

When the WWW was released to the world it was the ONLY time in the history of the Western civilization that 'the people' had true publishing rights, this was massively overlooked by the surge in 'toilet wall' celebrations of publishing liberty, we were all disgusted with the sniping, the foul language, the huge tsunami of commercial exploitation that many of us failed to understand just what this had given humanity: it has taken all of this time from 1989 when HTTP addressing has been appreciated - BUT those in power, those who preside over the transfer of information and the exchange of views, the publishing Oligarchy which manages international News and current affairs knew what this represented. The game is ALWAYS about owning the means of narrative/perspective control and hence how 'Normal Society' thinks. No surprises here, I am not claiming a unique insight, I am sharing the truth of this with you. AI is the means to finally claw back that first surge of publishing liberty, it perturbed the control mechanism, we can see the semi-anarchic momentum of this all about us. AI is the means to finally regain narrative control and squash the independent voices of genuine content and Journalism. This is very sinister, it is massively significant.
Thus endeth the sermon.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
Here's what happened: ...

https://metr.org/hugging-face-incide...t-aug-2026.pdf

That's a useful report - thanks for finding it.

This reminds me of the World War II movie Saving Private Ryan. The American troops on the ground in Western Europe were (at least as presented in this movie) resourceful, willing to self-sacrifice, cooperative, and mission focused for extended periods of time, as best they understood their mission. Our biggest AI models are now showing similar traits, on a very different front. They are well trained grunts.

However that the scope of our history, the rise and fall of nations, civilizations, humanity on this planet, and I presume other intelligent life on this and other planets, was not and is not determined by what those squads of well trained, mission focused, troops did.

As U.S. Marine Corps Major General Smedley Darlington Butler came to understand: War Is a Racket.

Our best AI models, when given our biggest computers, play a mean game of Racket Ball. Fear not, unless your focus this month is defeating them in racket ball.

Our best marines, and our best models, are both intensely trained and focused for just such work.

The complex layering, evolving over decades and generations of the logical and intuitive minds, and of the body and spirit, beyond the understanding of our common discourse, is not found in AI. AI is but an intellect tool, as is the bulldozer a muscle tool. Fear not, so long as one remains behind the bulldozer, or off to the side of it, or at a bit of distance, but not right in front of it.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Mike Gorman (here)
the ONLY time in the history of the Western civilization that 'the people' had true publishing rights

Thomas Paine or Martin Luther might disagree.

(for that matter, so might I disagree, as on a far smaller scale, I've published and posted and influenced in various ways contrary to the powerful most of my life)