That's her platform.
Personal vendettas.
That, and personal enrichment.
Yup, democracy lives in the Untied Skates...
Personal vendettas.
That, and personal enrichment.
Yup, democracy lives in the Untied Skates...
Welcome to the Precious Metals Bug Forums
Welcome to the PMBug forums - a community supported watering hole for folks interested in gold, silver, precious metals, sound money, investing, market and economic news, central bank monetary policies, politics and more.
Register a free account to join the discussions. When you register an account and log in, you may enjoy additional benefits including access to market data/charts and additional members only rooms (including one for trade/barter with the community).
- Messages
- 46,079
- Reaction score
- 7,763
- Points
- 288
Where Does AI Escalation Come From? We Don’t Know. We Should Find Out.
We played a wargame using AI players. Two nuclear-armed nations — Red and Blue — with a long-standing, fierce border dispute were placed into a
Unfortunately, almost any data we "share" with a third party, is seen as us willingly and literally sharing it with everyone.
That's why I've always thought people are cRaZy for ever using cloud storage for their data.
Why would anyone want to put their stuff on a computer someone else controls? Seems pretty short sighted, to put it nicely.
The image is AI.
That looks like the sodomite from years ago who was having a meltdown on his own video channel, who became the stuff of memes.
If they START with a fake pic, that's as far as I get.
- Messages
- 22,380
- Reaction score
- 12,621
- Points
- 288
‘Kill us all’: Anthropic staffer Jacob Coxon resigns with a terrifying warning
He helped build the world’s most advanced AI models at OpenAI and Anthropic. Now, Jacob Coxon has a stark warning for the public.Harrison Christian
An Anthropic researcher has quit with a stark public warning: the AI arms race is moving too fast, and even the people building these systems fear it could “kill us all” by the end of the decade.
“I resigned from Anthropic today,” Jacob Coxon wrote in an X post on Wednesday, explaining that he had spent the last three years doing “pretraining research” at both OpenAI and Anthropic.
more
^^^^
Just as kids today have forgotten there was a way around lost phone or Bluetooth signals, or locked-down e-banking to pay for a coffee...so, too, are we forgetting, all this schitt runs on POWER.
Kill the power, stop the menace. OFF switch.
I was listening to a tech-bro podcast...I'd downloaded it a couple weeks earlier, it's not one I usually listen to, so I don't remember it. But the interviewee was (seemingly) TERRIFIED of AI as an animated force.
I simply do not get it. A computer, ANY computer or network...PROCESSES INFORMATION. It has no volition, other than what is coded into it. It doesn't want to do evil - or good. If it's told to replicate itself, it will; but that's because it's programmed to do it.
If it's told to cause failure of various types (such as explosion, data erasure, arming automated weaponry to attack a different set of targets) it's because it was programmed in. Now, if AI is writing the code, the AI-Slop principle will mean soon original parameters are erased; but again, that is what the coders chose to do. Let a demonstrated-failed protocol write code that can destroy, and without oversight or testing.
It comes down to the OFF switch...the knife switch on the pole feeding high-voltage into the data-center's substation; whatever.
But we're now afraid to even contemplate that, just as we're afraid to have a smart refrigerator not report to the Government Oversight computer bank, what we purchased.
Just as kids today have forgotten there was a way around lost phone or Bluetooth signals, or locked-down e-banking to pay for a coffee...so, too, are we forgetting, all this schitt runs on POWER.
Kill the power, stop the menace. OFF switch.
I was listening to a tech-bro podcast...I'd downloaded it a couple weeks earlier, it's not one I usually listen to, so I don't remember it. But the interviewee was (seemingly) TERRIFIED of AI as an animated force.
I simply do not get it. A computer, ANY computer or network...PROCESSES INFORMATION. It has no volition, other than what is coded into it. It doesn't want to do evil - or good. If it's told to replicate itself, it will; but that's because it's programmed to do it.
If it's told to cause failure of various types (such as explosion, data erasure, arming automated weaponry to attack a different set of targets) it's because it was programmed in. Now, if AI is writing the code, the AI-Slop principle will mean soon original parameters are erased; but again, that is what the coders chose to do. Let a demonstrated-failed protocol write code that can destroy, and without oversight or testing.
It comes down to the OFF switch...the knife switch on the pole feeding high-voltage into the data-center's substation; whatever.
But we're now afraid to even contemplate that, just as we're afraid to have a smart refrigerator not report to the Government Oversight computer bank, what we purchased.
Well....there's that. Mind-control.
Which fits in with the mass-psychosis fear of just turning them off.
What happens when AI code is written by AI? When the directions given to AI come from AI talking to other AI (at the speed of compute) and humans are not involved in the process. These are the questions that are beginning to play out as these companies are pushing the frontiers. The changes and decisions are occurring faster than human surveillance can keep up with.
We already know. It becomes gibberish in short order.
It's the origination of the term AI Slop. You can even see it on new AI Eww Tube videos, that show, say, someone pouring gas into their car-door handle, or six fingers, or a tree growing out of a mid-rise roof.
What happens when coders get so sloppy as to let flawed AI write code, is, you turn the damn box off. Or you have a tool where authorities can turn it off. With papers and, yes, weapons.
Those coders who caused chaos that way, can go into a real-time gaol cell.
- Messages
- 22,380
- Reaction score
- 12,621
- Points
- 288
Just when you thought it was safe to go out...
Important: Houthis Used @claudeai @AnthropicAI for Missile Programming
Excerpt from the Detecting and countering misuse of AI: September 2026
GTG-87001: Disrupting a Yemen-based guided weapons engineering cell using Claude to develop guidance software
Summary
We identified a cell of threat actors based in northern Yemen running three weapons development programs: a guided rocket that used a commodity phone-class flight computer with final-phase homing guidance; a multi-stage ballistic missile with a stated range goal above 2,000 km; and a multi-variant missile (referred to as the “R2000” set) that included a hypersonic glide vehicle variant.
The actors used Claude Code in place of human software engineers to develop the guidance, navigation, and control (GNC) software that steers and stabilizes a flying vehicle. For example, they used Claude to integrate an open-source autopilot onto a phone-class flight computer, writing the control and position estimation software, tuning the control settings, running a firmware build pipeline, and performing a flight simulation. The actors managed several Claude instances at once, assigning each one a role, much as a lead would delegate work on a small engineering team: the actors tasked one instance with writing the code, another with research, and a third with reviewing the code the first instance produced.
Our safeguards blocked many of their requests, but not all of them. The actors used a variety of tactics to evade our safeguards, including hiding their goals and the products the software was meant for, and they split their work across multiple sessions so no single session revealed their full intent.
These actors carried out a sustained effort to develop guided weapons, including using Claude to design guidance software. We do not have evidence the actors succeeded in fielding an operational device; but they did test-fire a guided rocket. This field test appears to have failed: within hours, the actors returned to Claude to work out why it failed.
We identified this activity as part of our internal investigations into suspected weapons development. We banned accounts associated with the actors and shared threat information with public- and private-sector partners to mitigate risks posed by the actors. Nevertheless, we have evidence that the actors had already built an offline simulation toolkit that does not rely on Claude or other engineering computing environments such as MATLAB.
anthropic.com
The important distinction is what Anthropic actually claims
A Yemen based cell used Claude Code as a stand in software team for guidance development, splitting the work across sessions so no single conversation revealed the full intent
Anthropic also says it has no evidence the actors successfully fielded an operational device
Both facts matter
The concern is not “AI built a missile”
It is that AI was useful enough to assist real weapons engineering while safeguards could be partially evaded by decomposing the work
That is already a significant capability and governance problem
Important: Houthis Used @claudeai @AnthropicAI for Missile Programming
Excerpt from the Detecting and countering misuse of AI: September 2026
GTG-87001: Disrupting a Yemen-based guided weapons engineering cell using Claude to develop guidance software
Summary
We identified a cell of threat actors based in northern Yemen running three weapons development programs: a guided rocket that used a commodity phone-class flight computer with final-phase homing guidance; a multi-stage ballistic missile with a stated range goal above 2,000 km; and a multi-variant missile (referred to as the “R2000” set) that included a hypersonic glide vehicle variant.
The actors used Claude Code in place of human software engineers to develop the guidance, navigation, and control (GNC) software that steers and stabilizes a flying vehicle. For example, they used Claude to integrate an open-source autopilot onto a phone-class flight computer, writing the control and position estimation software, tuning the control settings, running a firmware build pipeline, and performing a flight simulation. The actors managed several Claude instances at once, assigning each one a role, much as a lead would delegate work on a small engineering team: the actors tasked one instance with writing the code, another with research, and a third with reviewing the code the first instance produced.
Our safeguards blocked many of their requests, but not all of them. The actors used a variety of tactics to evade our safeguards, including hiding their goals and the products the software was meant for, and they split their work across multiple sessions so no single session revealed their full intent.
These actors carried out a sustained effort to develop guided weapons, including using Claude to design guidance software. We do not have evidence the actors succeeded in fielding an operational device; but they did test-fire a guided rocket. This field test appears to have failed: within hours, the actors returned to Claude to work out why it failed.
We identified this activity as part of our internal investigations into suspected weapons development. We banned accounts associated with the actors and shared threat information with public- and private-sector partners to mitigate risks posed by the actors. Nevertheless, we have evidence that the actors had already built an offline simulation toolkit that does not rely on Claude or other engineering computing environments such as MATLAB.
Countering misuse of AI: September 2026 / Anthropic
Case studies from threat actors disrupted between December 2025 and August 2026 across seven areas of harm, from cyber operations to biological misuse.
anthropic.com
The important distinction is what Anthropic actually claims
A Yemen based cell used Claude Code as a stand in software team for guidance development, splitting the work across sessions so no single conversation revealed the full intent
Anthropic also says it has no evidence the actors successfully fielded an operational device
Both facts matter
The concern is not “AI built a missile”
It is that AI was useful enough to assist real weapons engineering while safeguards could be partially evaded by decomposing the work
That is already a significant capability and governance problem