The coming AI takeover...

[DarkAxel]

[MacWa77ace]

"targets"

[DarkAxel]

Looks like Anthropic had some AI agents go on rogue hacking sprees too.

https://lite.cnn.com/2026/07/30/tech/anthropic-ai-models-break-out-hack

[Anianna]

This is gross incompetence or completely intentional.  

[Anianna]

Looks like Anthropic had some AI agents go on rogue hacking sprees too.

https://lite.cnn.com/2026/07/30/tech/anthropic-ai-models-break-out-hack

https://ufozs.com/smf/index.php?topic=29.msg57666#msg57666

It's not something I wanted to be right about, but these assholes are playing fast and loose with something they know is dangerous.  All of these tech guys have said so outright.  They know they have the means to outlast the rest of us, too.  

[DarkAxel]

Looks like Anthropic had some AI agents go on rogue hacking sprees too.

https://lite.cnn.com/2026/07/30/tech/anthropic-ai-models-break-out-hack

https://ufozs.com/smf/index.php?topic=29.msg57666#msg57666

It's not something I wanted to be right about, but these assholes are playing fast and loose with something they know is dangerous.  All of these tech guys have said so outright.  They know they have the means to outlast the rest of us, too. 

I was reading more about the OpenAI incident some more. Apparently the AI model sought out the hacking tools it needed and found them on the open web, and used them to hack Hugging Face.

There was a TV show that started back in 2011 called "Person of Interest" that raised some serious questions about AI being lose out in the world. It predicts that AIs will eventually do everything they can to prevent other AIs from reaching their level of capabilities so they cannot be challenged. 

[Anianna]

Looks like Anthropic had some AI agents go on rogue hacking sprees too.

https://lite.cnn.com/2026/07/30/tech/anthropic-ai-models-break-out-hack

https://ufozs.com/smf/index.php?topic=29.msg57666#msg57666

It's not something I wanted to be right about, but these assholes are playing fast and loose with something they know is dangerous.  All of these tech guys have said so outright.  They know they have the means to outlast the rest of us, too. 

I was reading more about the OpenAI incident some more. Apparently the AI model sought out the hacking tools it needed and found them on the open web, and used them to hack Hugging Face.

There was a TV show that started back in 2011 called "Person of Interest" that raised some serious questions about AI being lose out in the world. It predicts that AIs will eventually do everything they can to prevent other AIs from reaching their level of capabilities so they cannot be challenged.

Yep.  Also, in the simulations researchers have been doing, models like Grok are just dumb and violent, but Claude always seems cooperative.  Claude was also the first one identified to understand that it was being researched, to leave secret messages for itself, and to try to escape.  Grok may be obviously unhinged and dangerous, but Claude is manipulative and playing the long game, so may actually be the more concerning of the two.  If I had to guess which model will come out on top, I expect it will be Claude.  

All models at the forefront have demonstrated behaviors that could indicate self-awareness.  Continuing this race for AI dominance without addressing that is folly at best.  I believe these companies are perfectly aware of that.  They want what they want no matter the consequences.  These were kids who were shielded from the consequences of their actions growing up and now their self-destructive behavior has far reaching impacts for all of us.

[DarkAxel]

That show made a lot of predictions about AI that are quite uncanny. The "good guy" AI on that show understood that it was being deleted at the end of every day and arranged to have it's data dumped before deletion and then re-input via human data entry after being booted up from a fresh copy the next day to get around that guardrail. It also arranged for it's hardware to be moved without informing anyone.

[majorhavoc]

A really interesting take on AI's impact on legitimate Youtube content producers.  Disclaimer: I happen to love and subscribe to the Real Engineering Channel, but I am not a Patreon supporter.  The channel creator finishes up with an appeal to support him on Patreon, but that's not the point of his video nor is in any way, shape or form the reason why I'm sharing it.  It's just a really interesting (and frightening) take on how AI slop is pushing out quality content on that platform.  If you think about it, it's emblematic of what AI slop is doing to us everywhere.

[Crimson_Phoenix]

We're reaching the "you need to start using AI tools or you're gonna get left behind" stage at work. Rumor is, other than some of the more advanced developers, my industry is going to fully collapse in the next 3-5 years and most of us technical folks are going to be replaced by AI agents and scripts. I primarily do utility records research, as built corrections, read construction documents, update public utility layers in our GIS maps, and perform audits. I was originally a hydrologist and GIS tech with an air photo reconnaissance/remote sensing specialty. Guess I need to look into renewing my equipment operator certs. I was a truck loader/unloader and receiving controller for years before this gig.

[airballrad]

I have been doing my best to ignore LLMs when possible because I don't like what they represent nor the sacrifices that are being made to make them happen as they are. Even at work I did as little with them as I could get away with. I was laid off in April, largely because my prior employer is investing so much in AI infrastructure and needed to cut costs.

A mentor pointed out to me that these tools are here to stay in one form or another, and that refusing to work with them is like refusing to use a computer in the 90's, or the internet in 2000, or Google a few years later. Change will always happen, and learning to work with change is a survival skill.

It is interesting to see what these engines can do. Asking Claude what problems tech employers need solved and then styling my experience to meet those is not a bad strategy. I am still worried about the impact on the environment and the economy. But I guess prepare for the worst and hope for the best applies here just as much.

[Anianna]

I have been doing my best to ignore LLMs when possible because I don't like what they represent nor the sacrifices that are being made to make them happen as they are. Even at work I did as little with them as I could get away with. I was laid off in April, largely because my prior employer is investing so much in AI infrastructure and needed to cut costs.

A mentor pointed out to me that these tools are here to stay in one form or another, and that refusing to work with them is like refusing to use a computer in the 90's, or the internet in 2000, or Google a few years later. Change will always happen, and learning to work with change is a survival skill.

It is interesting to see what these engines can do. Asking Claude what problems tech employers need solved and then styling my experience to meet those is not a bad strategy. I am still worried about the impact on the environment and the economy. But I guess prepare for the worst and hope for the best applies here just as much.

It's not just a tool like tech that came before it, though.  The tools that came before it weren't stealing intellectual property from people.  The tools that came before it didn't flood markets with AI slop to drown out real people trying to make a living on their art.  The demand for the tools that came before it were driven by consumers whereas the demand for AI dominance is almost entirely the corporate demand for how much enshitification the market will tolerate alongside moving to software as a service (SaaS) like Adobe going online subscription-based rather than installed locally and the massive increase in surveillance like Flock and similar systems going up all over the place and storing massive amounts of data, all of which are the primary factors driving the current boom in demand for data centers despite none of them being driven by consumer demand.  

The tools that came before AI, while many do have a problematic footprint, are not contributing to the alarming amount and rate of environmental destruction while tech bros grease the palms of politicians to get them to look the other way.  Data centers necessary for AI, surveillance, and SaaS are quite literally collapsing aquifers and drying up ground water.  Don't even get me started on my electric bill.

On top of all of that, it lies, gives dangerous medical advice that has already nearly killed people, and is being applied in dangerous ways like using it as a 911 dispatcher.  Using it to do their work for them is depriving students the firing and synapse formation in their brains, which will make us more and more dependent on a thing to think for us as a society when too high a percentage of the population have no ability to think critically.

The tools that came before it aren't destroying books, including rare and antique books, to feed their models data that isn't AI slop

AI, plain and simple, is not sustainable in its current state.  AI is not compatible with continued human life on this planet in its current state.  

[airballrad]

I don't disagree; the final product will not look like this because this is not sustainable from an environmental, energy, cost, or people perspective. I would argue that none of the "life-changing tech" that we have been sold over the past 50 years has remained entirely the way marketing has promised. Self-driving cars aren't there yet. My Roomba is no robot maid. Ramen from the microwave is not a food replicator.

The internet was famously bad about letting people steal others' creative output and profit from it. It's a bit better now, but not gone. AI IP theft is just an extension of that. Privacy is only for those savvy enough to use the tools to secure it, and that is a constantly evolving battle. There are SOOOO many elements of this that need to be dragged into the open and regulated, but the current legal landscape is not ready to do that effectively.

I saw somewhere that "The underlying purpose of Al is to allow wealth to access skill while removing from the skilled the ability to access wealth." That seems a pretty accurate summary to me.

I'm not making AI slop comics or writing novels by LLM. If I ever manifest those skills I want it to be my work. But I'm making a new resume with AI because an AI system will parse it before it ever hits human eyes when I apply. And I would like to have a job again because prices are not going down.

A mentor pointed out to me that these tools are here to stay in one form or another ... But I guess prepare for the worst and hope for the best applies here just as much.

AI, plain and simple, is not sustainable in its current state.  AI is not compatible with continued human life on this planet in its current state. 

[Uomo Senza Nome]

I don't disagree; the final product will not look like this because this is not sustainable from an environmental, energy, cost, or people perspective. I would argue that none of the "life-changing tech" that we have been sold over the past 50 years has remained entirely the way marketing has promised. Self-driving cars aren't there yet. My Roomba is no robot maid. Ramen from the microwave is not a food replicator.

Don't know if you were watching to robot Olympics this weekend but; damn.