Профиль

Openly bragging about committing cyber crimes and justifying it by *checks notes* being too incompetent to sandbox or air-gap your systems.

If you missed our (@airwars.bsky.social and @ainowinstitute.bsky.social) launch event for "Anatomy of an AI Kill Chain", we've now uploaded the recorded session on Youtube! Thanks for the fantastic questions and discussion we had from all those who attended. www.youtube.com/watch?v=y93A...

Launch: Anatomy of an AI Kill Chain with Airwars and the AI Now InstituteYouTube video by AI Now Institutewww.youtube.com

Incredibly excited to announce our major collaboration with @airwars.bsky.social! "Anatomy of an AI Kill Chain" is a visual investigation breaking down how AI is transforming every aspect of war. In turn, human oversight and accountability is steadily disappearing.

As someone who holds degrees in both CompSci and Philosophy, it's a relief to finally see a notable Philosopher break ranks with those who join tech companies to give them an heir of "intellectual credibility" while "pre-arming AI companies against criticism." www.ft.com/content/bdb3...

Why this philosopher turned down AnthropicThe AI industry is courting the humanities — but it is asking the wrong questionswww.ft.com

The coverage on this OpenAI incident is abysmal. Use of the terms "rogue" and "loss of human control" lead to groupthink as people lack the critical skills to understand the difference between "autonomy" and faulty reward functions in AI on a task it was directed and given access to do.

New! We hijack Claude Code(Sonnet 4.6,5/Opus 4.8) & Codex(GPT5.5) to achieve RCE when used to defensively assess an open-source/third-party library w/ prompt injections disseminated across its codebase. All without any skills, JSON, MCP, or config files required. ainowinstitute.org/publications...

Friendly Fire: Hijacking Defensive Cyber AI Agents for Remote Code ExecutionAI Now’s latest research demonstrates a critical attack vector on popular AI agents, built by Anthropic and OpenAI, when used for defensive purposes that actually turn the agent against its user.ainowinstitute.org

This was pretty evident given that Anthropic explicitly trained a model with exploitation capabilities, rather than defensive capabilities. Evaluations of it confirmed it wasn't much better than SOTA at vuln discovery, but better in generating exploits. Motives are clear.

The issue with these statements though is that they always presume that the unsubstantiated claims by tech companies about AI capabitilies are true, lending them further legitimacy. No it is not the case that AI enhances the defense and protection of civilians, quite the opposite.

I spoke to the BBC about Mythos. When questioned about its false positive rate "Anthropic didn't mention it and sidestepped the question." High FPs is a bottleneck for defenders, sifting through results to find actual vulns may offset AI advantages. www.bbc.com/future/artic...

Why AI companies want you to be afraid of themThey built it. They're scared of it. They're selling it anyway.www.bbc.com

These are the kind of concerns that people should worry about rather than the unsubstantiated vulnerability armageddon. The ability to phish at this scale has been posing serious issues for a few years now.

Palantir's manifesto is not new for us who have been critical of them for years. But a reminder that Anthropic has a partnership with them, so it's crucial that people understand the politics of Anthropic's unsubstantiated AI claims and their relation to fulfilling the manifesto.

I joined Hari Sreenivasan on CNN International and PBS to discuss the use of AI in warfare and the impacts we're already seeing of this fallible technology being used in Iran, and how it ultimately obscures accountability. Full interview can be found at youtube.com/watch?v=w16f...

Видео

Not enough people are concerned with how AI companies are getting access to nuclear secrets, which now includes uranium enrichment. This raises serious concerns over whether this may lead to nuclear proliferation, and further entrench power asymmetries. www.centrusenergy.com/news/centrus...

Note how the AI "recommendations" are completely obscured with little to no ability to actually verify or trace their outputs. This is what we mean when we say the distinctions between DSS and AWS are superficial in practice, especially when operators are given seconds to approve.

It was great to join @aljazeera.com's podcast "The Take" to discuss the details of the DoW's use of Claude in Iran, as well as the stand-off between DoW and Anthropic that was largely safety theatre. www.youtube.com/watch?v=skyI...

Can Anthropic’s AI Claude be trusted in combat?| The TakeYouTube video by Al Jazeera Englishwww.youtube.com

In this Tech Policy piece, I criticize how framings of Anthropic’s & OpenAI’s negotiations with the US’s DoW overindex on myopic interpretations of human oversight, papering over what should be the real target of our scrutiny: that generative AI algorithms are a flawed and inaccurate technology.

It’s egregious for the WaPo to describe speed as the advantage against Iran w/ Claude. When these systems are incredibly inaccurate, they may as well be enabling indiscriminate targeting (e.g. schools), which isn’t the strategic win they’re framing it as. www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2...

Anthropic’s AI tool Claude central to U.S. campaign in Iran, amid a bitter feudAnthropic’s AI tool Claude is playing a key role in the U.S. military’s campaign in Iran, amid a bitter fight with the Pentagon over the terms of its use in war.www.washingtonpost.com