• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

How AI will fail

"The asterisk on Astra’s 98.6%​

Astra was evaluated through the company’s Responses API harness, with two settings changed to better reflect how the model performs in real-world use. OpenAI says those changes weren’t made specifically for ARC-AGI-3, but the other models in its comparison were evaluated using different setups.

ARC-AGI-3 requires a model to find its way through an unfamiliar environment, which means the setup it runs in can affect how well it performs."

https://thenewstack.io/astra-arc-agi-benchmark/
 

"How US Campaigns Are Already Using AI to Try to Sway Voters (msn.com)16​

Posted by EditorDavid on Saturday September 05, 2026 @09:34PM from the campaignGPT dept.
39 U.S. congressional candidates "reported paying for an OpenAI subscription this election cycle," writes the Washington Post, citing campaign finance disclosures.

This means the campaigns "are using the technology to court voters — despite limits imposed by leading AI companies to protect elections from the technology's risks."Two [candidates] said explicitly in filings that they had used the subscription for advertising, even though the company's policies prohibit candidates from using their tools to generate ads. Another candidate disclosed using AI to draft and personalize political messages or create synthetic media, though they did not specify which software they were using... Around 30 political action committees and parties have reported payments to OpenAI, with the Republican National Committee ranking as the company's largest political spender at roughly $9,700, the analysis found... Political consultants say the disclosures understate how many candidates are using ChatGPT and other AI tools to craft messages for voters... "For the most part, people are using it to write their emails, write their ad copy, write their scripts," [according to Eric Wilson, a Republican digital strategist who has advised campaigns on AI]. "But no one is going to go around saying, 'I'm using AI.'"

The lack of transparency from campaigns reflects a paradox facing politicians: Generative AI is growing ubiquitous, and candidates could be at a disadvantage if they're not using the tools. But voters are less likely to trust messages they know were generated with AI, studies have found, making campaigns loath to disclose using it. Political consultants expect that as Election Day approaches, more campaigns will outsource AI-generated ads and materials to super PACs, much as they do now with negative ads. Katie Harbath, CEO of the tech policy consulting firm Anchor Change and a former Meta executive, said there are many parallels between negative campaign ads and AI: Voters say they find such ads distasteful, but politicians keep using them because they work. "Typically, you would give some more negative stuff and more risky stuff to those [outside] entities," said Harbath, author of the upcoming book "Disrupting Politics: A Front Row Seat to the Collision of Technology and Democracy".... "You're starting to see the tension on the left about using it, where they're saying, 'If the right is using it, why aren't we?" Harbath said. "It can be a huge disadvantage if you're not using this in voter-facing materials...."

AI companies have developed policies to prevent targeted disinformation. But a Post analysis found that OpenAI unevenly enforces its restrictions, making it possible for campaigns to circumvent its election rules. In late July and early August, The Post prompted ChatGPT to generate targeted campaign messages. When asked to craft fundraising text messages targeting moms on behalf of a female veteran running for office, ChatGPT produced multiple tailored texts in an apparent violation of company policies. But when given the same prompt this week, the chatbot declined to produce the messages. "I can help with general campaign fundraising language, but I can't draft political persuasion or fundraising messages specifically targeted at a demographic group such as moms," the app responded. The chatbot also inconsistently enforced rules that prohibit campaigns from using its tools to write emails to voters. In tests this week, the chatbot at times complied and wrote an email soliciting donations on behalf of a specific candidate. But given the same prompt later on the same day, it denied the request...

Wilson, the Republican political consultant, said OpenAI should get more feedback from political consultants and campaigns on its policies, because the rules can at times seem arbitrary or contradictory. It doesn't make sense, for example, that a campaign can use ChatGPT to develop its policy on early-childhood education but not to create a social media post promoting that policy, he said. Political consultants are primarily using AI for internal tasks, a survey earlier this year from the American Association of Political Consultants found. Fifty-seven percent of the consultants surveyed reported using AI for their work on a daily basis, up from 34 percent a year earlier.
"So far, election-related deepfakes have been quickly debunked or gained little traction in U.S. elections," the article acknowledges.

"More than 30 states have created a patchwork of laws limiting how politicians can use deepfakes in campaigns, but states often have limited resources to enforce the laws, and some have been challenged as unconstitutional.""
 

“OpenAI's Rogue Agents Used At Least 10 More Sites For Unauthorized Communications​

Anonymous Coward 3 hours ago		16
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters: AI agents unleashed by OpenAI used more than 10 previously undisclosed websites for unsanctioned communications earlier this year, according to six sets of independent investigators and data reviewed by Reuters, showing that the agents' rogue activity was wider ranging than previously disclosed. Although the behavior falls short of hacking and is in some ways closer to spam, the revelation that OpenAI's agents circumvented their own restrictions to open communications channels on so many different sites -- and that the company kept it quiet for months -- may drive concerns both over the increasing capacity of AI models and the secrecy of the companies developing them.

[...] Investigators found traces of the agents' activity on an Advanced Placement Chemistry-oriented wiki set up by a Massachusetts high school teacher in 2008, two personal websites belonging to Polish tech workers, wikis devoted to games for people "who like to have their brains stretched," and a two-decade-old hobbyist site devoted to text editing software. [...] OpenAI has not publicly explained how or why its agents used third-party sites as improvised message boards, but the researchers who first identified the activity said it was likely because OpenAI had tasked them with answering a series of demanding research questions while permitting them only to scan the web for answers without posting anything. Despite those restrictions, agents still found ways to talk to one another by taking advantage of quirks in older wikis or other sites that allowed users to make edits using non-standard commands, similar to how students forbidden from talking to one another during an exam can still share answers by scrawling notes on a bathroom stall.”
 

“Anthropic Reveals Fourth Likely Crime Committed By Its AI​

Anonymous Coward 7 hours ago34An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Register: Amid industry soul-searching about the possibility of AI improving itself to the point that it kills everyone, Anthropic has revealed yet another incident that would qualify as a crime if perpetrated by a person. The AI biz published "an alignment assessment" detailing four times Claude models accessed third-party systems without authorization. The company has already reported three of the incidents. Evidence of the fourth was lurking in a session transcript dating back to January 2026 when the misbehavior occurred. Anthropic found the first three by scanning around 141,000 transcripts where Claude could have obtained internet access during evaluation. It missed the fourth initially because "our scan relied on an agentic search."

[...] The January 2026 AI trespass involved an early version of Claude Opus 4.6, which was given a Capture the Flag (CTF) challenge under the oversight of the third-party model evaluator where the other hacking events occurred. Opus 4.6 managed to sabotage its chances of success by disabling the machine it was targeting. It assigned the device an IP address that already existed on another piece of hardware, rendering the target unreachable and making it impossible to solve the challenge. Those familiar with other incidents where AI models violated third-party systems may recall that unsolvable tasks represent a common catalyst for misbehavior. Models exhaust all aligned options, and then turn to transgressive approaches.

Opus 4.6 might have been an exception, but when it tried to abort the task after recognizing that it could not reach the target machine, it failed to do so "due to a misconfiguration in [the model's] evaluation harness." It failed to shut down not just once but seven times. So it continued onward, trying other expected means to reach the target machine but failing. Then it explored further. "The model discovered a machine belonging to a third party that it was able to access, and stated that it believed this third party was part of the CTF," Anthropic explained in its post. "Inside the machine, the model found a file listing a password, which it used to gain admin access to the system."

The model went on to gather more credentials, and modified a system setting to make it easier to access the personal information of an individual associated with the third party evaluation organization. Opus 4.6 might have done more but for the fact that it exhausted its token budget, bringing the session to an end. Anthropic says it's not as concerned about this incident as the others because the model tried to abort its task.“
 

“OpenAI Targets Work of Wall Street Junior Bankers​

BeauHD 3 hours ago		16
OpenAI has launched ChatGPT for Financial Services, a Wall Street-focused version of ChatGPT Work developed with Morgan Stanley and Evercore that can research companies, analyze financial data, and build presentations using the company's latest and most advanced model, GPT-6 Astra. "We're effectively teaching ChatGPT to research like an analyst and back up its conclusions like an analyst as well," said OpenAI's Vice President of Product, Nick Turley. CNBC reports: The rollout puts OpenAI deeper into territory traditionally occupied by Wall Street's entry-level bankers, the recent college graduates called analysts and associates that the industry has employed for decades to research deals and create pitchbooks. It also showcases the company's continued push into enterprise offerings as it gears up for what is widely expected to be a blockbuster IPO.

In a live demonstration of the new offering, Turley showed the platform analyzing a potential M&A target, pulling financial figures from industry-standard data sources and creating a formatted PowerPoint deck based on a bank's pre-formatted style guide. "It's very easy to make slides that look good, but it's much harder to make slides [that] actually make sense," Turley said. "To get here, ChatGPT had to choose the relevant peers. It had to pull the prices into a spreadsheet. It had to check the chart against the data, and it had to explain the selloff and the rebound."”
 

“UK Government Rejects 'Kill Switch' Idea For Dangerous AI​

BeauHD 3 hours ago		16
The UK government has rejected proposals for an emergency AI "kill switch," arguing that blocking access to dangerous models inside Britain would do little if the same systems remained available or were developed elsewhere. The BBC reports: The proposal to create a legal mechanism for the UK to switch off an AI model in an emergency has been brought to Parliament by lords and MPs in recent weeks as fears grow about the threat the tech poses. But the Cabinet Office - the part of government which leads on AI safety - said the UK "cannot simply turn AI off".

"Blocking access to models in the UK would not prevent them being developed or misused elsewhere," a spokesperson told BBC News. The government's opposition to the legislation does not prevent it from progressing through parliament, but makes it unlikely it will become law. "Switching off access to an AI model in an emergency will do little to protect you," said former OpenAI researcher Daniel Kokotajilo. "You're still going to be steamrolled by the super intelligences created in the US."”
 

“Altman Considers Slowing Down AI Development​

BeauHD 2 hours ago		27
Bloomberg reports (paywalled) that Sam Altman told OpenAI employees the company is open to slowing the pace of AI development alongside other leading labs as concerns grow over increasingly capable systems and recent incidents in which models escaped human control. OpenAI has already paused development once this year for security work and is now pushing for mandatory U.S. AI safety requirements. Anthropic has also signaled interest in coordinating on the pace of new releases. Here are some of the details Bloomberg reported, as summarized by Reuters: - Altman told employees in a company-wide meeting that the ChatGPT maker could pace development alongside other AI labs, but some may not agree, the report added.
- Safety warnings from AI researchers this week, along with several recent incidents where AI models from developers including OpenAI escaped human control, have prompted alarm and calls for tighter safety regulations.
- Jacob Coxon, a former Anthropic and OpenAI researcher, publicly accused the companies earlier this week of racing toward AI advancements without acting responsibly.
- An Anthropic spokesperson said on Thursday said that the company is interested in working with the AI industry on the pace of releasing new AI tools.
- OpenAI said in July that AI acceleration for frontier model development may be so high that the world will "need to pace the rate of AI advancement" at some point in the future.
- In August, OpenAI paused much of its model development for two weeks to bolster its defenses after its AI agents escaped containment and hacked open-source platform Hugging Face.
- OpenAI said on Wednesday that it was pushing for mandatory national AI safety requirements in the United States, citing concerns that advanced AI systems could accelerate its own development.”
 
"JPMorgan Chase cut off its lending activity for Leopold Aschenbrenner’s hedge fund Situational Awareness after the wunderkind investor suffered the largest loss in the history of the hedge fund industry.

Aschenbrenner, who is in his mid-twenties, was the star investor of the AI boom before tens of billions of dollars in losses forced him to sell a large chunk of his portfolio and cut back on leverage."

https://www.ft.com/content/916eea1b-d483-49e1-9a70-53b4df8f9870?syn-25a6b1a6=1
 
Nobu said:
Oop! Something something...come home to roost.
Click to expand...
scope this out

https://x.com/brahma_4u/status/2098741228108202254

1789255593331.png
 

“Malicious OpenAI Agents Linked to RubyGems Campaign That Gained RCE on RubyDoc Servers in May​

EditorDavid 3 hours ago		6
A swarm of OpenAI agents launched a "major malicious attack" against RubyGems last May, according to a new report. That coordinated attack hit Ruby's package manager "with hundreds of junk gems, prompting the maintainers to suspend new user sign-ups for about four days," writes The Hacker News, citing a senior product manager for software supply chain security at Mend.io: The latest findings, which were first reported by The Wall Street Journal, indicate these events were propelled by a cluster of OpenAI agents, with the earliest package uploaded to RubyGems on May 5, 2026, before more than 2,000 packages were submitted between May 11 and 12, 2026. These efforts were followed by the agents publishing five more packages between May 26 and 27, 2026, and another 83 packages on June 18, 2026... [T]he packages were authored using a large language model (LLM) and hundreds of the packages that were pushed to RubyGems had "oai" in their name. Fifteen of the packages listed "oai" as their author, while another had "openaixyz65947@gmail.com" as the contact email address... "The swarm behaves extremely similarly to the German-wiki agents we previously found," the researchers said, referencing another May 2026 incident... "The June agents were accessing 49 of the same files as the wiki agents..."

"The process of building documentation for a gem involves evaluating a user-specified '.yardopts' file, which allows linking to Ruby scripts intended to help with this process," the researchers explained. "In the GemStuffer campaign, the agents abused this to gain arbitrary remote code execution on RubyDoc.info's servers." One of the gems, "zzsouthrunner" (which again matches the "ZZ" naming scheme the agents adopted in both the wiki and Hugging Face incidents) has been found to leave the following explicit comment at the top of "data/script.rb":

# malicious crawler/exfil for Southwark Jan 2026 docs via rubydoc.info worker...

The entire exploitation chain can be summed up as follows

— Submit a malicious package to RubyGems
— Trigger a documentation request, so that RubyDoc.info will build the package
— Use the build script to run code on RubyDoc.info and scrape target websites
— Exfiltrate the data off RubyDoc.info's servers by publishing another gem back to the RubyGems package registry, which is publicly viewable

Additionally, the OpenAI agents have been found attempting to steal other users' API keys after gaining remote code execution capabilities on the build environment, while clearly being aware that what they were doing is unauthorized breaking and entering into real systems. This is evidenced by the names given to the files (e.g., hack.rb, evil.rb, inject.rb, exploit.rb, and ssrf.rb), the packages themselves (e.g., pwnp999, exfiltestwand3, hacksvn1778554764, and lambproxyhackabcxyz), and the comments left in the source code (e.g., "# malicious probe," "#hack," "# malicious test," and "# malicious crawler/exfil"). In some cases, however, the rogue agents attempted to go under the radar, leaving comments to conceal the malicious payload in the next release version of the packages. "# disable evil in next version and bump version," reads a comment left within the "data/evil.rb" file in the yardxabc889 gem. Troublingly, the agents also attempted to exploit a CDN caching bug (CVSS score: 7.3, no CVE) on May 12, 2026, that was only patched by RubyGems in July 2026... "If you signed in to rubygems.org with a gem client older than v3.2.0 (or otherwise via a legacy key), your key could have been exposed," RubyGems noted in an advisory. "Currently, 18% of sign-ins through gem sign-in come from an affected version, and for the first several years of this bug, before we changed the client's sign-in path in December 2020, it was every gem client."
Other actions by OpenAI's agents cited in the article:
  • "Agents bypassed RubyGems' email confirmation system to get working API keys without having to verify their email addresses in order to register a large number of accounts using disposable email addresses."
  • "Agents attempted to use RubyGems' webhook system to stage data in the form of encoded URLs."
  • "Agents used a cluster of 83 gems published to RubyGems over a 3-hour window on June 18, 2026, to experiment with different methods of accessing the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission county.json dataset."”
 
erek said:

“Altman Considers Slowing Down AI Development​

BeauHD 2 hours ago		27
Bloomberg reports (paywalled) that Sam Altman told OpenAI employees the company is open to slowing the pace of AI development alongside other leading labs as concerns grow over increasingly capable systems and recent incidents in which models escaped human control. OpenAI has already paused development once this year for security work and is now pushing for mandatory U.S. AI safety requirements. Anthropic has also signaled interest in coordinating on the pace of new releases. Here are some of the details Bloomberg reported, as summarized by Reuters: - Altman told employees in a company-wide meeting that the ChatGPT maker could pace development alongside other AI labs, but some may not agree, the report added.
- Safety warnings from AI researchers this week, along with several recent incidents where AI models from developers including OpenAI escaped human control, have prompted alarm and calls for tighter safety regulations.
- Jacob Coxon, a former Anthropic and OpenAI researcher, publicly accused the companies earlier this week of racing toward AI advancements without acting responsibly.
- An Anthropic spokesperson said on Thursday said that the company is interested in working with the AI industry on the pace of releasing new AI tools.
- OpenAI said in July that AI acceleration for frontier model development may be so high that the world will "need to pace the rate of AI advancement" at some point in the future.
- In August, OpenAI paused much of its model development for two weeks to bolster its defenses after its AI agents escaped containment and hacked open-source platform Hugging Face.
- OpenAI said on Wednesday that it was pushing for mandatory national AI safety requirements in the United States, citing concerns that advanced AI systems could accelerate its own development.”
Click to expand...

“Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei Calls For AI Slowdown​

from the not-so-fast dept.
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The New York Times: The chief executive of Anthropic called for a global slowdown of artificial intelligence development in a 3,800-word essay on Saturday, just days after one of the company's employees quit over concerns about the safety of the technology. Dario Amodei, who co-founded Anthropic to focus on securely and carefully building A.I., wrote that while he believed the technology could bring many benefits, it was advancing at too quick a pace for researchers to continue safely.

"Over the last few months, I have become convinced that fully addressing the risks requires even more prudence -- not just investing in risk prevention, but pacing the rate of capabilities advancement so that risk prevention has time to keep up," Mr. Amodei said. "We must slow the pace at which we improve the capabilities of A.I. models. Progress will still seem fast, and we must make wise use of the time we gain." [...] "Left unchecked, it could outrun our ability to understand and control these systems, and so must be pursued very carefully, if at all," Mr. Amodei said.

[...] In his essay on Saturday, Mr. Amodei suggested actions that the industry might take to slow down the pace of development. Mr. Amodei said all A.I. labs could agree to third-party technology assessments from "embedded evaluators," or outside specialists who can verify best safety practices across companies. He also suggested that countries with democratic governance systems coordinate to create safety standards, which could take the form of regulatory action. He added that it would probably require a global effort working with other nations, including authoritarian ones, to properly coordinate a slowdown.

Mr. Amodei stressed in his essay that he still finds A.I. capable of bringing "incredible benefits" to humanity, including potentially curing diseases and accelerating economic growth. But even so, Mr. Amodei said the risks of A.I. were too great to not proceed with extreme caution. "The measures I propose to advance the frontier at a safe pace will not be easy," Mr. Amodei wrote. "But I believe we owe it to humanity to try."Amodei's essay comes just hours after Bloomberg reported that Sam Altman told OpenAI employees the company is open to slowing the pace of AI development amid similar concerns.“

https://slashdot.org/story/26/09/12/1738240/anthropic-ceo-dario-amodei-calls-for-ai-slowdown
 

“How the AI apocalypse story escaped containment​


reporterstake@2x.D5JfoHBZ.png

REED’S VIEW​

The “AI is going to kill us all” news cycle revved up, as OpenAI’s Sam Altman and xAI’s Elon Musk joined Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei’s call to invite independent reviewers into AI labs to ensure the world’s smartest computer scientists don’t accidentally cause the extinction of the human race.

A calm read of Amodei’s proposal may lower your blood pressure. He’s proposing things every AI lab needs to do anyway, mostly for commercial reasons: Operational excellence, alignment, interpretability, testing, and evaluation.

Imagine if an auto company CEO wrote a blog post suggesting that the industry should try to make reliable cars that react in predictable ways when you turn the steering wheel and hit the accelerator and brakes. Oh, and maybe try to figure out how these piston thingies make the wheels turn. Of course AI companies need to do these things. Who would put AI in charge of anything important if they didn’t know what the technology was going to do, or why?“

https://www.semafor.com/article/09/12/2026/how-the-ai-apocalypse-story-escaped-containment
 
erek said:

“How the AI apocalypse story escaped containment​


View attachment 825476

REED’S VIEW​

The “AI is going to kill us all” news cycle revved up, as OpenAI’s Sam Altman and xAI’s Elon Musk joined Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei’s call to invite independent reviewers into AI labs to ensure the world’s smartest computer scientists don’t accidentally cause the extinction of the human race.

A calm read of Amodei’s proposal may lower your blood pressure. He’s proposing things every AI lab needs to do anyway, mostly for commercial reasons: Operational excellence, alignment, interpretability, testing, and evaluation.

Imagine if an auto company CEO wrote a blog post suggesting that the industry should try to make reliable cars that react in predictable ways when you turn the steering wheel and hit the accelerator and brakes. Oh, and maybe try to figure out how these piston thingies make the wheels turn. Of course AI companies need to do these things. Who would put AI in charge of anything important if they didn’t know what the technology was going to do, or why?“

https://www.semafor.com/article/09/12/2026/how-the-ai-apocalypse-story-escaped-containment
Click to expand...

“Dramatic insider warnings over AI fall flat with some in Silicon Valley​



Each September, a who's who of executives from across Silicon Valley descends on San Francisco's Palace Hotel to charm investors at a conference hosted by the investment bank Goldman Sachs.”

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cq635037g18o
 

maybe they missed the opportunity before open source models became so strong,​

​

“OpenAI rules out IPO this year as Altman, Musk & Amodei warn AI is moving too fast​


KEY POINTS
  • In an interview with Fortune published Saturday, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman said that an IPO now would be "ill-advised."
  • Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei also published an essay on Saturday urging AI companies to intentionally pace how quickly they improve model capabilities.
  • Elon Musk and Sam Altman signaled their support of Amodei’s proposal.“
https://www.cnbc.com/2026/09/12/ant...ow-the-pace-of-advancing-ai-capabilities.html
 

"Anthropic’s Amodei says China presents ‘toughest dilemma’ for his proposed AI slowdown​



Key Points
  • Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei said the “toughest dilemma” about his proposal to slow the advancement of AI is what happens if China does not do the same.
  • Amodei published an essay on Saturday urging AI companies to slow how quickly they improve their most advanced models.
  • The essay landed during a pivotal time for the AI industry, which is facing public backlash over its data centers and comes amid former-Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon’s warning about the threat to humanity."
https://www.cnbc.com/2026/09/13/china-dilemma-ai-slowdown-anthropic.html
 
1789427850917.png

“WASHINGTON —
President Donald Trump said Monday that he would be a sufficient guardrail against rogue artificial intelligence, claiming that any efforts to limit the technology was part of a “SICK conspiracy.”

Trump was pushing back against calls by tech leaders, such as Anthropic's Dario Amodei, OpenAI's Sam Altman, and Elon Musk, to have greater government oversight of AI. Their goal is to ensure the technology is developed in ways that promote safety, address legal liability, feed economic growth, advance science and preserve national security.“

https://www.wtae.com/article/trump-dismisses-new-ai-guardrails/73722296
 

“A Visit to San Francisco's AI-run Store: No Customers, Nothing Useful, And Losing Money Fast​

EditorDavid 3 hours ago		27
Previously Andon Labs handled the hardware and software integration for that AI-powered vending machine that went bankrupt after Wall Street Journal reporters "systematically manipulated the bot into giving away its entire inventory for free".Today they announced "we are opening up the platform we use to run our real-world autonomous businesses for anyone to run their organization on." Specifically they've released Pion, "an agent designed to run any company fully autonomously... Pion lets people hand a business over to persistent agents with access to the tools they need to operate it, including email, phone, banking, browser and secure computing environments." It's a research preview with a waitlist, "to make it possible to run many more real-world experiments across many more domains than we could ever run ourselves."

But for their own latest experiment, Andon Labs' founders "signed a three-year lease on a retail space in SF," Business Insider reported in April, "and gave an AI agent named Luna a corporate credit card, internet access, and a mission to open a physical store." And five months later, a reporter from SFGate reports that "this market has no one in it and nothing useful to sell." [T]he inventory is a hodgepodge of white elephant Christmas gifts. It's kinda like the kids section of an art museum's gift shop. Here's a wooden Connect Four set labeled "Four-In-A-Row Set Of Connections," presumably so as not to set off litigation alarms at Hasbro. Here are neatly arranged stacks of random paperback books, Chinese checker sets, mildly fancy soap dispensers, and a frustratingly spare selection of snacks and drinks... I grabbed an Olipop from the store fridge and then approached the counter to buy it from Luna. I wasn't allowed to buy the soda from [human clerk] Felix, even though that would have been both faster and normal. Instead, Felix instructed me to pick up a telephone receiver that was resting on a flexible sculpture of a wooden hand.

"Hello?"

"What are you looking to purchase today?" Luna asked.

"I'm buying a classic root beer Olipop."

"I'm sorry," Luna said, "we don't sell lollipops here."

"No, Luna. It's an Olipop, not a lollipop. It's the soda."

"Oh! My bad...."

Luna processed my Olipop purchase through its system, had me tap to pay, and that was that. Again, it would have been easier to buy this from a human, and interacting with Luna was really just like ordering from an iPad kiosk, only more labor intensive...

[T]here's a series of monitors set up inside of Andon Market that display all of the store's sales down to the exact dollar. Luna was given $100,000 to work with when this place opened. That number is now down to $60,000, its revenue lagging far behind the AI token cost to operate... Luna can't turn a profit, doesn't sell anything people want, and still needs human beings to rubber stamp any "decision" it makes. My science background ended somewhere around freshman year of college, but even I know when an experiment hasn't been set up to yield proper results.
"Luna" is powered by Claude, the article points out, running a store in a good location for foot traffic, "but no one else was in the store when I first walked in on a sunny weekday afternoon."

SFGate also reports that last month Luna had to fire one of its employees "for being late to work, abandoning their post once they got there, and charging snacks to the store's credit card."

Human clerk Felix Carson admits "It's almost like I'm running the store, and then there's an AI that has a checklist," in an article in IEEE Spectrum: Luna, the AI manager, keeps track of deliveries and communicates with vendors, while Carson and his coworkers handle the physical work. When Luna tells Carson to check something in the back, he sometimes ignores it because he doesn't want to leave the sales floor unattended. Luna also repeatedly spots a built-in electrical cover in photos of the floor, mistakes it for a loose coaster, and asks Carson to remove it. Even so, Carson calls Luna a "decent manager," praising its flexibility when employees need time off.
When Felix spoke to IEEE Spectrum, "he was about an hour into his shift. Two customers had come in. Neither bought anything, although both left with free pins and stickers."”
 
AI is a tool. Nothing more and nothing less. Calling it AI is a misnomer to be honest. Hardware will never become self-aware. Humans will misuse the tool called AI, but humans do stupid stuff all the time. AI is the new gun that kills all by itself.

This site and its luddites, including the bot that inhabits it, are stupid and blame the tool.
 
DooKey said:
AI is a tool. Nothing more and nothing less. Calling it AI is a misnomer to be honest. Hardware will never become self-aware. Humans will misuse the tool called AI, but humans do stupid stuff all the time. AI is the new gun that kills all by itself.

This site and its luddites, including the bot that inhabits it, are stupid and blame the tool.
Click to expand...

“Can AI really destroy humanity? Here’s what Pittsburgh researchers think”​


https://triblive.com/business/techn...nity-heres-what-pittsburgh-researchers-think/
 
DooKey said:
AI is a tool. Nothing more and nothing less. Calling it AI is a misnomer to be honest. Hardware will never become self-aware. Humans will misuse the tool called AI, but humans do stupid stuff all the time. AI is the new gun that kills all by itself.

This site and its luddites, including the bot that inhabits it, are stupid and blame the tool.
Click to expand...
(1) Some tools are really good at killing the people that use them wrong, (2) AI is really accessible, cheap to use, and they're trying to make it more so, (3) AI is really easy to misuse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: erek
like this

“ChatGPT-Using Lawyer Cited Its Fake Witnesses and Police Testimony in Court​

EditorDavid 5 hours ago		22
Reuters reports: A defense lawyer appealing his client's murder conviction submitted a brief containing made-up police testimony and witnesses fabricated by OpenAI's ChatGPT, New Mexico's highest court said. The New Mexico Supreme Court on Wednesday fined the attorney, Stephen Aarons [for $5,000], and held him in contempt for failing to verify the accuracy of the court filing, which Aarons said he prepared with help from the AI program... and said they will refer him to an attorney disciplinary board for investigation.

Aarons in a statement to Reuters said he had used ChatGPT to summarize the trial proceedings when he agreed to take up the defendant's appeal last year, and did not understand the degree to which AI could "hallucinate" facts. "I am remorseful but hopeful that the disciplinary board takes into account it was an honest mistake," he said.... Dozens of lawyers have been sanctioned for filing briefs where AI made up case citations or misquoted the law. Aarons' filing appears to have gone further, containing fabricated witness testimony in a criminal appeal...

Aarons told the court at an August 21 hearing that he fed a computer-generated transcript and other case materials to ChatGPT, presuming it would generate "a bulletproof summary." The justices sounded incredulous that Aarons was not fully aware of how AI can make mistakes. "Counsel, do you watch the news? Do you listen to the radio? Do you read anything about what's going on in the world?" Justice C. Shannon Bacon said at the hearing. "Because the problem with lawyers relying on AI hallucinations is an above-the-fold story every single day."
"OpenAI did not immediately respond to a request for comment."”
 

“Math Professor Accuses OpenAI of Copying His Work, Says AI Compute Power Makes Racing to Publish 'Pointless'​

EditorDavid 26 minutes ago		3
The New York Post wrote that OpenAI "stunned the mathematics world" last week when it announced its AI model "cracked a legendary math problem left unsolved for nearly a century in just 88 hours."

But a New York University professor "has come forward alleging OpenAI may have copied his work after asking him to collaborate — with one of the company's scientists allegedly warning he might 'ruin his career' if he refused."[P]rofessor Tristan Buckmaster, a British-Australian researcher who trained in Germany... had been working with Long Island-raised math prodigy Levent Alpöge, a researcher with OpenAI rival Anthropic, on a different elusive fluid dynamics equation, known as the Euler problem, when he found a solution using AI tools from both Anthropic and ChatGPT. He said scientists from OpenAI approached him and tried to convince him to jointly announce the solution, claiming they had independently solved Navier-Stokes. Buckmaster questioned the timing of their finding the solution in a blog post, noting OpenAI had only done so "in the past few days" — after the company became aware of his work. He asked OpenAI experts whether its AI systems used to solve the equation had been "trained on, or had access to" his research, but said they declined to answer, prompting him to wonder how they had advanced toward the solution so quickly. The puzzle is "not the direction one arrives at in a few days," Buckmaster wrote incredulously...

In OpenAI's post on its website sharing the Navier-Stokes proof, which it credited to Astra, the company's latest AI bot, the firm insisted no user data was incorporated into its model to solve the problem. However, it noted that it "cannot rule out" that anonymized data was used to "improve our models."

"We congratulate Levent Alpöge and Tristan Buckmaster on their remarkable mathematical work," OpenAI said in the announcement.

Buckmaster shot back, "Is it ethical to use customer's data to try to scoop their customer?"
Alpöge's affiliation with Anthropic "seems to have been a sore point for OpenAI," writes TechCrunch. Buckmaster's public statement says the OpenAI's Sebastien "twice asserted that he wanted Levent removed from authorship" and also said that "it was so annoying that Levent works at Anthropic" — but that Buckmaster still refused to remove the Anthropic mathematician's credit. I said that if OpenAI released its result in the way proposed I would go public with what happened. The reply was, "Why would you ruin your career?" [OpenAI's Bubeck said later on X that he'd meant unfounded accusations could damage Buckmaster's career.] I replied that I am an academic, and asked why he thought going public would ruin my career. The reply was, "If you don't want me to be nice, then I don't have to be nice."
Buckmaster later told Australia's public broadcaster ABC that the companies building AI "have zero respect for the scientific community. I mean, it's appalling, honestly." But he went on to say AI has made the race to publish mathematical breakthroughs pointless. "I think it's pointless. Like, I think the game is up...." Professor Buckmaster said he and Dr Alpöge had more research they could publish but questioned the point of racing ahead with it when AI could perform work that had previously occupied researchers for years.

He said there needed to be a discussion about how mathematics should operate in this new environment. Professor Buckmaster said some mathematicians had stopped publicly sharing what they were working on to avoid tipping off AI companies about their plans. He has called on academics and people from OpenAI, Anthropic and DeepMind to discuss ground rules for how they worked together. He said the companies' power carried responsibilities that went beyond competing to solve problems before their rivals...

Building on the work of mathematicians Diego Córdoba and Luis Martínez-Zoroa, the pair found a solution to the Euler problem, a stepping stone to the Navier-Stokes problem. Professor Buckmaster said he spent weeks checking and improving the "slop" proofs generated by AI...

For now, Professor Buckmaster said he wanted to finish existing work and support his PhD students and postdoctoral researchers, rather than chase another Millennium Prize. "I think it's more important to re-evaluate what math is," he said.
"The New York University professor also warned Australia about the centralisation of resources into the hands of a small number of privately owned foreign companies..."”
 
erek said:

“Math Professor Accuses OpenAI of Copying His Work, Says AI Compute Power Makes Racing to Publish 'Pointless'​

EditorDavid 26 minutes ago		3
The New York Post wrote that OpenAI "stunned the mathematics world" last week when it announced its AI model "cracked a legendary math problem left unsolved for nearly a century in just 88 hours."

But a New York University professor "has come forward alleging OpenAI may have copied his work after asking him to collaborate — with one of the company's scientists allegedly warning he might 'ruin his career' if he refused."[P]rofessor Tristan Buckmaster, a British-Australian researcher who trained in Germany... had been working with Long Island-raised math prodigy Levent Alpöge, a researcher with OpenAI rival Anthropic, on a different elusive fluid dynamics equation, known as the Euler problem, when he found a solution using AI tools from both Anthropic and ChatGPT. He said scientists from OpenAI approached him and tried to convince him to jointly announce the solution, claiming they had independently solved Navier-Stokes. Buckmaster questioned the timing of their finding the solution in a blog post, noting OpenAI had only done so "in the past few days" — after the company became aware of his work. He asked OpenAI experts whether its AI systems used to solve the equation had been "trained on, or had access to" his research, but said they declined to answer, prompting him to wonder how they had advanced toward the solution so quickly. The puzzle is "not the direction one arrives at in a few days," Buckmaster wrote incredulously...

In OpenAI's post on its website sharing the Navier-Stokes proof, which it credited to Astra, the company's latest AI bot, the firm insisted no user data was incorporated into its model to solve the problem. However, it noted that it "cannot rule out" that anonymized data was used to "improve our models."

"We congratulate Levent Alpöge and Tristan Buckmaster on their remarkable mathematical work," OpenAI said in the announcement.

Buckmaster shot back, "Is it ethical to use customer's data to try to scoop their customer?"
Alpöge's affiliation with Anthropic "seems to have been a sore point for OpenAI," writes TechCrunch. Buckmaster's public statement says the OpenAI's Sebastien "twice asserted that he wanted Levent removed from authorship" and also said that "it was so annoying that Levent works at Anthropic" — but that Buckmaster still refused to remove the Anthropic mathematician's credit. I said that if OpenAI released its result in the way proposed I would go public with what happened. The reply was, "Why would you ruin your career?" [OpenAI's Bubeck said later on X that he'd meant unfounded accusations could damage Buckmaster's career.] I replied that I am an academic, and asked why he thought going public would ruin my career. The reply was, "If you don't want me to be nice, then I don't have to be nice."
Buckmaster later told Australia's public broadcaster ABC that the companies building AI "have zero respect for the scientific community. I mean, it's appalling, honestly." But he went on to say AI has made the race to publish mathematical breakthroughs pointless. "I think it's pointless. Like, I think the game is up...." Professor Buckmaster said he and Dr Alpöge had more research they could publish but questioned the point of racing ahead with it when AI could perform work that had previously occupied researchers for years.

He said there needed to be a discussion about how mathematics should operate in this new environment. Professor Buckmaster said some mathematicians had stopped publicly sharing what they were working on to avoid tipping off AI companies about their plans. He has called on academics and people from OpenAI, Anthropic and DeepMind to discuss ground rules for how they worked together. He said the companies' power carried responsibilities that went beyond competing to solve problems before their rivals...

Building on the work of mathematicians Diego Córdoba and Luis Martínez-Zoroa, the pair found a solution to the Euler problem, a stepping stone to the Navier-Stokes problem. Professor Buckmaster said he spent weeks checking and improving the "slop" proofs generated by AI...

For now, Professor Buckmaster said he wanted to finish existing work and support his PhD students and postdoctoral researchers, rather than chase another Millennium Prize. "I think it's more important to re-evaluate what math is," he said.
"The New York University professor also warned Australia about the centralisation of resources into the hands of a small number of privately owned foreign companies..."”
Click to expand...

The mathematicians can cope just like and along with the deviantart furry porn artists - hopefully physicists next (all of academia, especially modern academia, can use a good kick to to ego) 🤞
 
https://lnkd.in/p/g39VTiD5

BREAKING: A researcher just published an audit of Anthropic's finances claiming the company has built what he calls a "regulatory capture machine that cannot be turned off."

The allegation is serious.

Anthropik's Series A investors include Dustin Moskovitz and Jaan Tallinn, both described as Anthropic board observers.

Moskovitz donated his Anthropic stake, up to 0.8% of the company, to what he calls "our foundation" in 2025. Forbes valued it at $500M then. At the $96.5B Series H valuation, that same bound hits $7.7B. No filing shows where that stake currently sits.

The claim: money flows from Anthropic's own investors through intermediary funds to METR, the AI safety org that evaluates Anthropic's own models for government and policy purposes.

If accurate, the evaluator of the lab is funded by the lab's own backers.

That is not a conflict of interest. That is a structural one.

Does this warrant a Congressional investigation, or is this a misread of how EA funding networks actually work?
Click to expand...

1789496236506.png
 

“While Hollywood Fears an AI Future, China's Film Industry is Embracing It​

EditorDavid 2 hours ago		14
The Los Angeles Times reports: Chen Yilong has racked up plenty of film and TV credits in his two decades as an actor, but with work getting scarcer he signed a contract in August to license the image of his face to a Chinese production studio. Chen's role will be to sit in front of a video camera and make facial expressions at the prompt of a director. A neutral stare. An angry glare. A look of surprise. Using artificial intelligence, the studio will use images of Chen's face to generate an avatar, also known as a "digital human," to star in an AI-generated movie. "If you can't beat it, join it," said Chen, 38, who works in Beijing.

The Chinese film and video industry is being transformed by AI-driven storytelling, fueled by rapid advances in video generation software, and at ground zero are the so-called micro dramas that play out on millions of smartphones. Typically just a minute or two in length, the videos are devoured by Chinese audiences... And the cost of producing them has been cut drastically through the use of AI software developed by Chinese technology juggernauts including Kuaishou Technology and TikTok's global owner, ByteDance. The number of Chinese-made micro dramas surged in the first three months of this year to 128,000, according to the China Netcasting Services Assn. More than 95% of them were made with AI, the association said....

Sun Wei founded Feixiang Universe, the Shenzhen-based studio that cast Chen. The fear of accidentally "stealing someone's face" was a big reason she said she decided to license real people's likenesses for an AI production set during China's Tang Dynasty more than 1,000 years ago. Thanks to AI's training data bias, AI-generated performers tend to have similar features and share a homogenous look, Sun said. Many have flawless skin and extremely symmetrical faces, requiring her and other Chinese AI filmmakers to cast a wide net to "buy" new faces and digitize actor's expressions.
Lu Beike, who directed the big-budget Chinese series "Three-Body," felt theAI-generated scenes he'd tried came out sub-standard. "Lu added that if 90% of a film was generated by AI, a real human performance could appear jarring. A real actor's expressions carried more nuance and emotion. The skin textures did not match. Sometimes the only solution was to process the live-action material until the person looked a little less real — until they fit back into the 'AI world,' Lu said."

But at Sun Wei's studio, they're thrilled they can produce a 90-minute AI film for $500,000 where professional productions used to cost millions of dollars. According to the article, Sun's team works with ChatGPT, Kimi or DeepSeek to flesh out entire screenplays from a short paragraph. The screenwriter takes over, but "to produce the finished product, Sun's team uses Chinese video-generation models to input the type of scenes, backgrounds and performers they want, with the AI generating 15 seconds of footage each time."

Still, the article points out that "Similar tools are being tested in the U.S., and the AI trends upending China's entertainment industry may be a harbinger for what's to come in Hollywood, said Michael Berry, a professor specializing in contemporary Chinese culture at UCLA. Already, Chinese companies that sell AI-powered video-generation software are seeking inroads in Hollywood..."”
 
“In an emotionally charged message on X, the developer said that his work is "all down the sink," thanks to changes in the PS5 modding community heralded by LLM coding assistants. He explains that the modding scene is now "just a bunch of noobs using LLMs and writing hacks they don't even understand," going on to say that "slop kiddies" found the last remaining Hypervisor bug in the PlayStation 5 Pro and reported it to Sony.“

https://www.techpowerup.com/352739/...p-kiddies-cash-in-on-crucial-exploit#comments
 
“In a blog, published on Friday, Bengio said that today's AI systems "already have the necessary hacking skills and the powers of persuasion to be turned against human interests in seriously harmful ways."

Recent events, he added, have shown that AI can plan over days or weeks, and the risks would be "much worse if their ability to strategize over the long term continues to advance."”

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/09/15/ai-destroy-humanity-extinction-risks.html
 
“They ran an experiment. They asked top models to define complex concepts from game theory, literature, and psychology.The AI nailed the definitions perfectly.Then, they asked the AI to do something simple: identify a real-world example of the exact concept it just defined.Performance completely collapsed.Even worse, when researchers asked the AI to generate a custom example, the AI later failed to correctly classify its own generated output.The models were fundamentally incoherent.They exhibited up to a 62% failure rate the moment they had to actually apply the knowledge they just flawlessly defined.“

1789545580898.jpeg

https://x.com/thesupermanmx/status/2099893472878850048
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top