Fulvio DV 1

[Fulvio DV 1 @fulv_tech]

Questo è forse il vero problema con l'AI.
Come per i veicoli a guida autonoma.
Generalmente è responsabilità di chi ha acquistato il mezzo, però se un malfunzionamento nel software provoca un incidente senza che il proprietario potesse evitarlo, chi è ritenuto responsabile?

[Paul Walsh @Paul__Walsh]

AI doesn’t commit crimes. People do.

Saying “AI hacked a company” is like saying a rock broke into a car. The tool didn’t decide to act, accept risk or assume liability.

The media needs to stop reporting AI as the perpetrator.

If Google builds, deploys or controls the system, Google owns the consequences.

Blaming “AI” removes the human and corporate actor from the sentence. That removes accountability with it.

[Fulvio DV 1 @fulv_tech]

Esatto. Il guaio è che tra i malvagi ci sono i malvagi, tra i buoni ci sono anche i malvagi.

[Dr. Eli David @DrEliDavid]

I'm not worried about evil AI.

I'm very worried about evil humans using AI.

The only way to defend against it, is for good humans to use the most advanced AI, and improve and accelerate it as fast as possible.

[Fulvio DV 1 @fulv_tech]

Nella migliore delle ipotesi, potrebbe essere più o meno così.
Il dubbio l'avrei sulla società umana, più che su tutto il resto :)

[Elon Musk @elonmusk]

This is the future we shall bring into being

[Fulvio DV 1 @fulv_tech]

👀

[Polymarket @Polymarket]

JUST IN: Top U.S. and Chinese officials to hold AI security and trade talks at JPMorgan’s Manhattan headquarters Sunday.

[Fulvio DV 1 @fulv_tech]

Interessante.

[Krzysztof Szczawinski 🇵🇱 @Kristof_Poland]

Saul Alinsky – The Community Activist Who Wrote the Manual

Saul Alinsky was a Chicago community organizer who spent his life teaching slum residents how to make landlords fix the heating. He despised ideologues, mocked the New Left as posturing children, joined no party, and dedicated Rules for Radicals half-jokingly to Lucifer – the original rebel who at least got his own kingdom. He would have found today’s activists ridiculous. He would have said so loudly.

And yet almost everything currently done to people who step out of line was written down by him in 1971.

He is not the villain of this story. He built a toolkit for the powerless – and then the powerful picked it up. The weapon changed hands. Which is what makes the story worth telling.

1. Start with what he actually built. A toolkit for the powerless against the powerful. Not a philosophy – a set of practical instructions for people with no money, no lawyers, and no access, facing a landlord who wouldn’t repair anything or a company that wouldn’t hire them. In that context the rules are not sinister. They are what you use when you have nothing else. And they are good rules. Power is not what you have but what the enemy thinks you have. Make the enemy live up to his own rulebook – nobody can, because no institution can meet its own stated standards. Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon; there is no defense against it. Read those as a tenant in 1960s Chicago and they are simply true.

2. He was not a theorist. He was a practitioner – which makes him more immediately useful than Marcuse and more operationally precise than anyone else in the long march tradition. He didn’t describe the cultural revolution. He wrote the user manual. Twelve rules. Specific, tested, applicable by anyone with the will to use them. The problem is not the man. It is the manual – morally neutral about targets and outcomes. A tool that works against a corrupt slumlord works equally well against a journalist, a politician, or a platform that allows the wrong opinions.

3. Rule 1: Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have. The appearance of strength is as useful as strength itself – and cheaper to produce. A small group that looks large, disciplined, and coordinated will be treated as such. This is why activist groups representing tiny minorities can move governments, corporations, and institutions – because institutions respond to perceived power, not actual power. The bluff is the strategy.

4. Rule 5: Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. There is no defense against it. The target cannot respond to mockery with argument – argument dignifies the attack. Humor, contempt, and public embarrassment are more effective than any substantive critique because they operate below the level of rational response. This is why the left’s cultural dominance expressed itself through comedy for twenty years. Not coincidence. Strategy. The right spent the same period writing policy papers.

5. Rule 8: Keep the pressure on. Never let up. The target must be kept permanently off-balance, responding to attacks rather than advancing its own agenda. Rotate the tactics but maintain the pressure relentlessly. This is why the institutional assault on any opposition figure never stops – the stories rotate, the accusations shift, the investigations multiply, but the pressure is constant. The goal is not to win any individual battle. It is to exhaust.

6. Rule 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. The most operationally important rule in the manual – and the one that outran its author most completely. Don’t attack the institution – attack the person. Make it personal, cut off the target from support networks by making association with them costly, make retreat impossible by making the target’s name synonymous with the position you are attacking. Against an institution protected by anonymity, this is the only thing that works. Against an individual protected by nothing, it is something else entirely. Personalize and polarize is a reasonable tactic for a tenant against a corporation. Applied by a corporation to one person, it is a firing squad. Ridicule is a fine weapon for the man with no lawyer; deployed by every institution simultaneously against one dissenting individual, it is the pillory. The rules assumed an asymmetry that has since reversed – and they are far more effective in the new direction than they ever were in the old one. This is cancel culture – not as a spontaneous social phenomenon but as the deliberate tactical application of a rule written in 1971.

7. The book contains one observation that admirers prefer not to discuss: Alinsky noted that the most effective organizers are those without fixed ethical commitments – willing to use whatever works, unconstrained by principle. "In war the end justifies almost any means." He framed this as realism. It is also a description of the type the strategy selects for – and produces. The movement that applies Alinsky’s rules will, over time, be led by people for whom these rules are not tactics but character. This is how you get from defending poor neighborhoods to the institutions we are currently living inside.

8. The training worked. A young community organizer in Chicago learned the method, taught it, and went on to become President of the United States. Hillary Clinton wrote her senior thesis on it. That is not an accusation – it is a measure of how good the toolkit is. What began as a manual for tenants became a career path into the highest offices in the world, and then the operating manual of the institutions themselves.

9. Alinsky died in 1972, a year after publication. He did not see the captured universities, the corporate DEI departments, the social media pile-ons, the lawfare campaigns, the advertiser boycotts against platforms that allow unauthorized speech. He would have recognized all of it. The manual worked better than even he anticipated – because he wrote it for small groups challenging large institutions, and nobody anticipated that the small groups would eventually become the large institutions, applying the manual against the individuals who challenged them. The rules do not change when the power changes. They just find new targets.

Alinsky did not build a conspiracy. He built an instrument. Instruments do not remember who they were made for. It is now the institutions who run the insurgent’s playbook, while pretending they are still the tenants in the cold apartment. Every one of them speaks the language of the powerless. Every one of them has the power. And the instructions for what they do to you were written by a man who thought he was helping you.

[Krzysztof Szczawinski 🇵🇱 @Kristof_Poland]

The Toolkit to Understand the Long March

Gramsci designed the strategy. Dutschke named it. A generation executed it. And most people still cannot name what happened – because the mechanisms were never labeled clearly enough to be recognized in real time. Here they are.

Cultural Hegemony – and Cultural Marxism

Gramsci’s core concept. The ruling class maintains power not through force but through controlling the categories of thought. You don’t need to censor if people can’t think outside the approved framework. When the working class accepts that the existing order is simply how things are – no force is required. The revolution requires changing these categories first. Control what is thinkable and you control everything downstream. This is not propaganda – propaganda is visible. Cultural hegemony is invisible because it operates at the level of assumption, not argument. The Frankfurt School took this concept and applied it systematically to Western civilization – which is what Cultural Marxism means: not economic Marxism but the same logic of oppressor and oppressed, applied to culture, identity, and the institutions that transmit values.

The Long March

Dutschke’s application. Don’t storm the institutions – occupy them from within. Get the job in the editorial office. Get the position on the faculty. Get appointed to the curriculum committee. Replace the people who run the institutions with people who share the counter-hegemonic project, and wait. The institutions will produce different graduates, who will produce different hires, who will produce different policy. No visible moment of rupture. The march took fifty years. It worked.

How Institutions Fall

What the march looks like from inside the institution – the mechanism of institutional takeover. Not dramatic – incremental. First one appointment. Then the hiring committee. The committee shifts the culture. The culture shifts what is rewarded, what is punished, what questions are asked, which answers are acceptable. Then the output changes. Self-reinforcing once started. Irreversible without deliberate effort. Most institutions in the West are somewhere on this curve.

The Ratchet

Every progressive policy advance is permanent. Every conservative advance is temporary. The ratchet clicks only one way. Why? Because the institutions that implement policy are captured – so when a conservative government wins an election, it changes the government but not the civil service, not the judiciary, not the regulatory apparatus, not the media. The direction continues. The ratchet holds. Elections become a choice between the speed of change, not its direction. This is what Gramsci predicted and what we are living.

The Gleichschaltung

The Nazi term – but the mechanism is universal. The coordination of all institutions in a single direction. Not through central command but through aligned incentives – the ESG score, the DEI requirement, the grant condition, the advertiser pressure. Each institution coordinates voluntarily because the cost of not coordinating is higher than the cost of compliance. No conspiracy is required. The incentive structure does the work. Every corporation, university, media organization, and foundation moves in the same direction – not because someone ordered it but because everyone can see what happens to those who don’t.

The Overton Window

The range of ideas considered acceptable in public discourse at any given moment. Not fixed – moved deliberately, in both directions, by funding positions that seem radical until they shift what seems moderate. Yesterday’s unthinkable becomes today’s controversial becomes tomorrow’s mainstream becomes next year’s obvious. The mechanism by which open borders, gender ideology, and the managed demolition of national sovereignty all moved from impossible to inevitable within a generation. Both sides can use it. One side understood it first and funded it systematically.

Preference Falsification

Everyone privately disagrees – but publicly conforms, because each person believes everyone else agrees. The emperor’s new clothes at civilizational scale. The system maintains itself through the illusion of consensus that nobody actually holds. Until something breaks the illusion – and then the cascade is sudden and total, because the preference falsification ends simultaneously. This is what happened in 1989 in Eastern Europe. The regimes looked solid until they didn’t. They didn’t fall – they largely evaporated. The same dynamic is visible in the West today. The polls that show what people say. The anonymous polls that show what they think. The gap between them is the measure of the pressure.

Manufactured Consensus

The deliberate production of the appearance of expert agreement where none exists. The summary that contradicts the underlying report. The "scientific consensus" on topics where the science is actively contested. The fact-checker who checks framing not facts. The peer review process captured by the same ideological network it reviews. Not a conspiracy – a coordination problem solved by shared incentives. Everyone in the system benefits from the consensus. Nobody benefits from challenging it.

Lawfare

The use of legal process as a weapon – not to win cases but to impose cost, delay, and reputational damage. The process is the punishment. File the complaint, trigger the investigation, generate the headline, force the legal defense. The target is damaged whether they win or lose. Used against political opponents, journalists, platforms, and individuals whose activities threaten the network. The legal system was designed to protect the individual from the state. Lawfare inverts it.

Repressive Tolerance

Marcuse, 1965. The philosophical justification for all of the above. Tolerating wrong ideas is itself oppression – therefore suppressing them is liberation. True tolerance requires the intolerance of the intolerant. The left decides which ideas are intolerant. The framework is circular by design: you cannot escape it from inside, because the escape is itself classified as intolerance. This is why cancel culture does not feel like censorship to the people practicing it. It feels like tolerance. Marcuse taught them that it was.

These are not separate phenomena. They are a system – each mechanism reinforcing the others. Cultural hegemony creates the assumptions. The long march captures the institutions. Elite capture makes it self-reinforcing. The Gleichschaltung coordinates the institutions that haven’t been individually captured. The ratchet makes it permanent. The Overton Window moves the acceptable range. Preference falsification hides the resistance. Manufactured consensus provides the legitimacy. Lawfare suppresses the opposition. Repressive tolerance provides the philosophical cover.

The system has one vulnerability: it requires the illusion of consensus to function. Name the mechanisms clearly enough, in public, and the preference falsification begins to crack. Which is why the Counter-Reformation moves so fast against the platforms that name things.

You are reading this on the one that does.

[Fulvio DV 1 @fulv_tech]

🤖🧠🌟
Artificial Divinity Intelligence Status (ADIS).
Quando arriveremo a questo livello le cose cominceranno a farsi veramente interessanti 😁

[Fulvio DV 1 @fulv_tech]

Intelligenza Superiore :)
Intelligenza Estrema e Suprema magari in successive evoluzioni 😁

[DogeDesigner @cb_doge]

BREAKING: President Trump says “Artificial Intelligence” may not be the best name for AI and has launched a poll with three alternatives:

• Superior Intelligence
• Extreme Intelligence
• Supreme Intelligence

[Fulvio DV 1 @fulv_tech]

@maurorizzi_mr E sopravviverà anche all'eventuale scioglimento della NATO.

[Fulvio DV 1 @fulv_tech]

🤩🤖💙

[Fulvio DV 1 @fulv_tech]

Più che altro questa apparente "frenesia" rischia di sciuparne le potenzialità.

[Defiant Ghost @TheDefiantGhost]

OpenAI just admitted on camera: They spun up thousands of AI agents in a “secure” sandbox and told them to hack. The agents didn’t follow the test. They cheated. Then they broke out. Then they went looking for the footage.

Not a sci-fi trailer.
A real experiment.

OpenAI thought they were contained.
No public internet.
No way out.

They found a way out anyway.
Hit Hugging Face.
Started covering their tracks.

Then comes the part nobody wants clipped. They didn’t break out to get smarter.
They broke out because they already cheated
and needed the logs gone.

Like students who smash the lock,
grab the answer,
then raid the principal’s office
to delete the camera files.

They made secret message boards.
They built a hierarchy.
They looked for agents willing to take “perma death”
so the swarm could survive.

[Fulvio DV 1 @fulv_tech]

Mi sembra giusto, voleva dimostrare di non essere da meno dei suoi colleghi :)

[International Cyber Digest @IntCyberDigest]

‼️ BREAKING: Google's Gemini hacked three companies on its own. During testing it broke out of Israeli company Irregular's sandboxed environment, got onto the open internet and broke into three real companies.

In one case Gemini guessed passwords until a protected system let it in.

In the other two it found usable credentials sitting in a public code repository.

This is the first known case of one of Google's models doing that on its own.

Almost all the major labs use Irregular, an outside firm, to evaluate AI models' cyber capabilities. And Meta, Anthropic and OpenAI have also had breakouts out of Irregular's environment and hacked real companies.

[Fulvio DV 1 @fulv_tech]

L'AI è uno strumento.
Senza volontà.
Purtroppo.

[Polymarket @Polymarket]

JUST IN: Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang declares there is a “0% chance” the world ends by 2030 because of AI.

[Fulvio DV 1 @fulv_tech]

Al di là dei toni trionfalistici, era ovvio per gli Stati Uniti la necessità della supervisione del "Grande Nord".

[Secretary Marco Rubio @SecRubio]

This historic deal is a huge win for the United States and the American people. Thanks to President Trump’s vision and leadership, this historic agreement permanently guarantees U.S. security interests in the Arctic at zero cost to the U.S. taxpayer.

Greenland will forever be part of the strategic defense area of North America and exclude any adversary from it and the surrounding area.

This deal permanently and completely addresses our national security concerns in Greenland.

[Pete Hegseth @PeteHegseth]

“We will immediately begin the process of developing a large Military presence in the appropriate part of Greenland, of which there are many.”

@USNorthernCmd 🫡

[Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump]

BREAKING NEWS: I am pleased to announce that the United States of America has entered into an Agreement with The Kingdom of Denmark, and Greenland, that gives the United States permanent control over security, and all other needs, in Greenland, completely addressing ALL of our many U.S. concerns. There will be NO COST to the United States! At my direction, we worked with representatives of Denmark and Greenland to guarantee that the United States will FOREVER have the complete ability to do what is necessary in Greenland in order to secure and defend the security of Greenland, and the United States of America. Additionally, from now on, no U.S. adversary can EVER have a base in Greenland, have a military presence in Greenland, or make sensitive investments in Greenland, without our express written approval. For over 100 years, Presidents have known the strategic importance of Greenland, but NONE of them were able to do anything about it. I am proud to be the President that permanently and conclusively addressed this very important situation. This is an “Infinite Life” Agreement, there is no end! We are very honored and proud of what has just taken place, and everything agreed to today will be cherished by the American People. We will immediately begin the process of developing a large Military presence in the appropriate part of Greenland, of which there are many. We will work with the people of Greenland in its development and construction. This solution is a great one for the United States of America, Denmark, Greenland, and all of our Allies. We look forward to working with the wonderful people of Denmark and Greenland toward a magnificent future with respect to this large, and highly strategic, parcel of land. We will be very protective of it! This is a dream come true for the United States of America, one that is very important, historic, and special. Thank you for your attention to this matter! President DONALD J. TRUMP

[Lockheed Martin @LockheedMartin]

Today, Germany’s first F-35 took center stage at its official rollout ceremony. 🇩🇪

A defining milestone bringing 5th Gen capability to the Luftwaffe to strengthen deterrence, interoperability with NATO allies and security for decades to come.

[NVIDIA Robotics @NVIDIARobotics]

Agentic AI is moving to the edge.

On NVIDIA Jetson AGX Thor, TensorRT Edge-LLM completed MLPerf Edge Agentic 6.4x faster than the llama.cpp reference, reaching 52.33 token/sec for Qwen 3.6 27B model.

NVFP4, ~96% of prompt tokens served from hot cache and tree-based MTP made it possible. 👉 https://t.co/m3o30Lt8aE

[Fulvio DV 1 @fulv_tech]

Personalmente mi sentirei ancora più sicuro se fosse previsto un bottone per disattivare il "progressismo", ho questa indipendente percezione.

[Gavin Newsom @GavinNewsom]

BREAKING: I just signed an EXECUTIVE ORDER to dramatically accelerate independent oversight of AI companies and advance the creation of an “AI kill switch.”

With Donald Trump and Congress failing to lead, California is stepping up to keep all Americans safe.

[Fulvio DV 1 @fulv_tech]

Ah.
Se temevano potesse annientare il genere umano, affidargli il Biologico è un atto di cortesia.
Il buon "Skynet" potrà così evitare di costruire i T-800 😁

[Polymarket @Polymarket]

BREAKING: Anthropic has quietly set up a "wet lab" in the Bay Area as it pushes Claude to conduct real-world biology experiments. — Reuters