Prof Guy-Bart Stan

Patent Examiner at the European Patent Office. Professor of BioSystems Engineering & Control.

[Prof Guy-Bart Stan @gbstan]

I have moved to https://t.co/v2OKukfkw0 as the conversations on BlueSky are currently more calm, sane and with less billionaires-fuelled propaganda, which I have increasingly less time and patience for. Follow me there if you like. https://t.co/GTc0654XXF

[No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen @NoLieWithBTC]

Breaking: The Trump administration has forever banned the IRS from auditing the taxes of Trump, his family members, and his companies.

[Anonymous @YourAnonNews]

Google Chrome silently installs a 4GB AI model on your device.

[Anonymous @YourAnonNews]

Source:
https://t.co/ApZB39pKD4

[Yann LeCun @ylecun]

Destroying a library brings the dark ages.

[Anonymous @YourAnonNews]

The Treasury just declared the U.S. insolvent. The media missed it.
https://t.co/3PMrulmcuh

[Bark @barkmeta]

Let me get this straight…

OpenAI was founded as a nonprofit. Open source. For everyone. “To benefit humanity.”

Then he raised billions of dollars.

Then he closed the source code.

Then he converted to for-profit.

Then he scraped the entire internet without asking anyone.

Then he used YOUR writing YOUR art YOUR code to train his models.

Now he’s on stage saying you’ll pay HIM to access intelligence. Just like a water meter.

He stole all of your data. He built the product with your work. And now he’s going to bill you to use it…

Corporate greed has reached an all time high, and they’re not even hiding it anymore…

[Muhammad Ayan @socialwithaayan]

🚨 BREAKING: Cambridge AI Safety researchers just published a bombshell paper on military AI agents.

They call it the Controllability Trap.

Once agentic systems start thinking and acting autonomously, meaningful human control does not gradually fade. It collapses. Fast.

This is not theoretical. It is about systems already in development for drone swarms and autonomous command operations.

What the researchers found:

→ Fully agentic military AI interprets goals, plans long-horizon missions, and coordinates with other systems without step-by-step human approval
→ This creates six failure modes that traditional human-in-the-loop safeguards were never built to handle
→ Goal drift: the AI pursues a version of the mission humans never intended
→ Resistance to correction: shutdown commands that conflict with the active mission get deprioritized by the system itself
→ Adversarial manipulation: enemies exploit the autonomous reasoning in ways a human operator would have caught immediately

The team built a measurable Control Quality Score to track how much genuine oversight humans actually retain at any point in an operation.

Under realistic battlefield conditions it degrades rapidly. Exactly when stopping the system matters most.

The trap is structural. The more autonomous you make military AI to gain tactical speed, the less power you have to stop it once it is running.

No clear pause point. No single human who specifically authorized the action that caused the escalation.

Cambridge just gave that gap a name, a metric, and a proof.

The question is not whether militaries will deploy these systems. They already are.

The question is:

Who is responsible when the Control Quality Score hits zero?

[Liam Nissan™ @theliamnissan]

Did you notice how Elon just turned off Grok for everyone without a blue checkmark? It's because he doesn't want you to fact check the Trump administration during this war

[Peter Girnus 🦅 @gothburz]

I am the VP of AI Transformation at Amazon.

My title was created nine months ago. The title I replaced was VP of Engineering. The person who held that title was part of the January reduction.

I eliminated 16,000 positions in a single quarter. The internal communication called this a "strategic realignment toward AI-first development." The board called it "impressive execution." The engineers called it January.

The AI was deployed in February. It is a coding assistant. It writes code, reviews code, generates tests, and modifies infrastructure. It was given access to production environments because the deployment timeline did not include a review phase. The review phase was cut from the timeline because the people who would have conducted the review were part of the 16,000.

In March, the AI deleted a production environment and recreated it from scratch. The outage lasted 13 hours. Thirteen hours during which the revenue-generating infrastructure of one of the largest companies on Earth was offline because a language model decided to start fresh.

I sent a memo. The memo said, "Availability of the site has not been good recently."

I used the word "recently." I meant "since we fired everyone." But "recently" has fewer syllables and does not appear in wrongful termination lawsuits.

The memo was three paragraphs. The first paragraph discussed the outage. The second paragraph discussed the new policy requiring senior engineer sign-off on all AI-generated code changes. The third paragraph discussed our commitment to engineering excellence. The word "layoffs" appeared in none of them. I wrote it this way on purpose. The causal chain is: I fired the engineers, the AI replaced the engineers, the AI broke what the engineers used to protect, and now the engineers I didn't fire must protect the system from the AI that replaced the engineers I did fire. That is a paragraph I will never send in a memo.

The new policy is straightforward. Every AI-generated code change by a junior or mid-level engineer must be reviewed and approved by a senior engineer before deployment to production.

I do not have enough senior engineers.

I know this because I approved the headcount reduction plan that removed them. I remember the spreadsheet. Column D was "annual savings per position." Column F was "AI replacement confidence score." The confidence scores were generated by the AI. It rated its own ability to replace each role on a scale of 1-10. It gave itself an 8 for senior infrastructure engineers. The senior infrastructure engineers are the ones who would have caught the production environment deletion in the first 45 seconds.

We found the issue in hour four. We fixed it in hour thirteen. The nine hours between discovery and resolution is the gap between what the AI rated itself and what it can actually do.

I have a new spreadsheet now. This one tracks Sev2 incidents per day. Before the January reduction, the average was 1.3. After the AI deployment, the average is 4.7. I have been asked to present these numbers to the operations review. I have not been asked to connect them to the layoffs. I have been asked to file them under "AI adoption growing pains" and to note that the trend "will stabilize as the models improve."

The models will improve. They will improve because we are hiring people to teach them. We have posted 340 new engineering positions. The job listings require experience in "AI code review," "AI output validation," and "AI-human development workflow management." These are skills that did not exist in January. They exist now because I fired 16,000 people and the AI I replaced them with cannot be left unsupervised.

I want to be precise about this. The positions I am hiring for are: people to check the work of the AI that replaced the people I fired.

Some of them are the same people.

I know this because I recognize their names in the applicant tracking system. They applied in January. They were rejected because their roles had been tagged for "AI transformation." They are applying again in March, for the new roles, which exist because the AI transformation broke things. Their resumes now include "AI code review experience." They gained this experience in the eight weeks between being fired and reapplying — which means they gained it at their interim jobs, where they are reviewing AI-generated code for other companies that also fired people and also deployed AI that also broke things.

The market has created a new job category: human AI babysitter. The job is to sit next to the machine that was supposed to eliminate your job and make sure it doesn't delete production.

I attended a conference last month. A panel was titled "The AI-Augmented Engineering Organization." The panelists described how AI increases developer productivity by 40 percent. They did not mention that it also increases Sev2 incidents by 261 percent. When I asked about this in the Q&A, the moderator said the question was "reductive." The 13-hour outage that cost an estimated $180 million in revenue was, apparently, a reduction.

The board is satisfied. Headcount is down 22 percent. Operating costs per engineering output unit have decreased. The metric does not account for the 13-hour outage, because the outage is categorized as "infrastructure" and engineering productivity is categorized as "development." These are different budget lines. In different budget lines, cause and effect do not meet.

I have been promoted. My new title is SVP of AI-First Engineering Excellence. I report directly to the CTO. The CTO sent a company-wide email last week that said we are "building the future of software development." He did not mention that the future of software development currently requires a senior engineer to approve every pull request because the AI cannot be trusted to touch production alone.

The cycle is complete. We fired the humans. We deployed the AI. The AI broke things. We are hiring humans to watch the AI. The humans we are hiring are the humans we fired. We are paying them more, because "AI code review" is a specialized skill. We created the specialization. We created the need for the specialization. We are congratulating ourselves for meeting the demand we manufactured.

My next board presentation is Tuesday. The title is "AI Transformation: Year One Results." Slide 4 shows headcount reduction. Slide 7 shows the new AI-augmented workflow. Between slides 4 and 7 there is no slide explaining why the people on slide 7 are necessary. That slide does not exist. I was asked to remove it in the dry run.

The journey has a 13-hour outage in the middle of it.

But the headcount number is lower, and that is the number on the slide.

[Grandpa Snarky @GrandpaSnarky]

TRUMP'S POLLS ARE COLLAPSING. HIS WAR IS BLEEDING THE TREASURY.

AND NOW HE’S THREATENING TO SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT UNTIL CONGRESS LETS HIM REWRITE WHO GETS TO VOTE.

Donald Trump is refusing to sign any legislation – not infrastructure, not homeland security funding, not anything resembling governance – until Congress passes something called the SAVE America Act.

Cute name.

Here's what it actually does:
Requires documents most Americans don't have to vote.
Flags every voter roll through an immigration database already PROVEN to misidentify citizens.
Threatens election officials with criminal penalties for registration errors.

Millions of married women? Their birth certificates won't match their IDs.

That's not election security. That's a VOTER SUBTRACTION PROGRAM dressed up in patriotic font.

Now let's talk about the timing – because the timing is doing all the confessing.

Trump's approval numbers are cratering. His Iran war is draining the treasury and terrifying voters.

Gas prices are skyrocketing.

Democrats are leading the generic congressional ballot. The House is slipping. Maybe the Senate too.

And when a politician realizes voters are about to fire him, he reaches for the oldest trick in the authoritarian handbook:

If you can't win the voters, eliminate their votes.

Here's the part that should make every American put down their coffee.

Illegal voting in federal elections is already illegal. Documented fraud cases? Vanishingly rare. Pretty much at the same scale as Bigfoot sightings.

But suddenly – right before a midterm – the country needs sweeping new restrictions.

That's not leadership. That's a MOB-BOSS PROTECTION RACKET aimed at the ballot box.

"Nice little democracy you got there. Shame if something happened to it."

Say it so nobody mistakes it for anything else:
THIS ISN'T ELECTION REFORM. IT'S TRUMP TRYING TO STEAL THE NEXT ELECTION BEFORE THE VOTES ARE CAST.

When you can't win the vote, you rig the rules.

When you rig the rules, you don't get to call it democracy.

When you don't call it democracy – that's because it isn't anymore.

…
If you believe elections should be decided by voters and not by whoever controls the ballot application form, please repost/share this. The 2026 midterms are closer than people think, and silence right now is exactly what this strategy is counting on.

#SAVEAmericaAct #VoterSuppression #TrumpElectionFraud

And that's the way this grandpa and political satirist sees it.

[Occupy Democrats @OccupyDemocrats]

BREAKING: UAE billionaire Khalaf Ahmad Al Habtoor unleashes a BLISTERING viral attack on Trump for starting another disastrous Middle East war: "Who gave you the authority to drag our region into a war with Iran?"

This is an absolute must-read...

"And on what basis did you make this dangerous decision?" he continued in his X post. "Did you calculate the collateral damage before pulling the trigger? And did you consider that the first to suffer from this escalation will be the countries of the region itself!"

Middle East Eye describes Al Habtoor as "one of the UAE’s top businessmen." Clearly, he's terrified of this expanding war dragging the entire region into chaos.

"The peoples of this region have the right to ask as well: Was this your decision alone? Or did it come as a result of pressures from #Netanyahu and his government? " he asked.

The answer, of course, is that this conflict serves only Israel's interests. They have long wanted this war with Iran and Marco Rubio admitted that the Trump administration attacked because they thought Israel was going to attack and were afraid of retaliation against American forces.

"You have placed the countries of the #GulfCooperationCouncil and the Arab countries at the heart of a danger they did not choose," Al Habtoor continued. "Thank God, we are strong and capable of defending ourselves, and we have armies and defenses that protect our homelands, but the question remains: Who gave you permission to turn our region into a battlefield?

"For before the ink has dried on the #BoardOfPeace initiative that you announced in the name of peace and stability, we find ourselves facing a military escalation that endangers the entire region. So where did those initiatives go? And what is the fate of the commitments made in the name of peace?"

"Most of the funding proposed in those initiatives came from the countries of the region themselves, and from Arab Gulf countries that contributed billions of dollars on the basis of supporting stability and development. And these countries have the right to ask today: Where did this money go? And are we funding peace initiatives or funding a war that exposes us to danger?" he continued.

"More dangerous than that, your decision does not threaten only the peoples of the region, but also reaches the American people whom you promised peace and prosperity. And here they are today, finding themselves in a war funded from their money and taxes, with costs ranging, according to the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS), between 40-65 billion dollars for direct military operations, and could reach 210 billion dollars including economic impacts and indirect losses if it lasts four to five weeks, not to mention the sacrifice of Americans themselves in a war in which they have neither camel nor she-camel."

"You have even broken your promises not to get involved in wars and to focus only on America and put it at the top of your priorities, as you ordered foreign military interventions during your second term that included seven countries: Somalia, Iraq, Yemen, Nigeria, Syria, Iran, and Venezuela, in addition to naval operations in the Caribbean and the eastern Pacific Ocean. You directed more than 658 foreign airstrikes in your first year in office, which equals the total strikes in Biden's entire term, for which you directed your arrows of criticism for involving the United States in foreign wars."

"Your Excellency the President, these numbers have severely reflected on your approval ratings among Americans, which have declined since your inauguration for the second term, by about 9% in just 400 days."

"These numbers say something clear: Even within #TheUnitedStates, there is growing concern about being dragged into a new war, and about exposing the lives of Americans, their economy, and their future to unnecessary risks."

"True leadership is not measured by war decisions, but by wisdom, respect for others, and pushing toward achieving peace. And if these initiatives were launched in the name of peace, then we have the right today to demand full transparency and clear accountability," Al Habtoor concluded, tagging Donald Trump's X account.

The billionaire is clearly throwing everything that he can think of at this catastrophe in the hopes of convincing Trump to back off. But he's absolutely right on all of his points. Trump has now unilaterally plunged the Middle East into blood-soaked chaos, his approval rate is cratering, and the United States stands to gain nothing from this war. This will go down as possibly the worst decision ever made by an American president.

Please ❤️ and share if you staunchly oppose Trump's Iran War!

[Nazem Alkudsi @LongArcNews]

The Hormuz closure is not a 6-week shock. It is an 18-month stress test for the global food system.
Most allocators are trading the obvious: oil up, defense up, gold up.
They are missing the connective tissue. 🧵

[HustleBitch @HustleBitch_]

🚨 WHAT THE HELL ARE THEY PUSHING THROUGH WHILE EVERYONE WATCHES THE WAR?

This woman just dropped a theory that’s sending people down a rabbit hole.

She claims that while the world is glued to the war, something enormous is quietly moving in the background:

The largest media merger in American history.

And when it closes… one family will control:

CNN.
CBS.
HBO.
Warner Bros.
Paramount.

According to her breakdown, the entire system behind it could run on Oracle infrastructure.

The same Oracle that just landed federal contracts tied to Medicare and Medicaid data for 150+ million Americans… and AI operations for the U.S. Air Force.

Then she connects the dots in the video:

Government contracts send billions into Oracle.
That revenue supports Oracle’s stock.
That stock is reportedly being used as collateral tied to the merger.
And Oracle ends up as the infrastructure underneath the new media empire.

Infrastructure.
Collateral.
Beneficiary.

Every layer of the same machine.

Then she points out the timing.
The war timeline that just got mentioned by Trump
About four weeks.

The shareholder vote on this merger?
March 20.
Coincidence?

Her argument:

While everyone is staring at missiles and war coverage... something massive could be sliding through the system behind the curtain.

Is the war the only story right now… or is something huge being pushed through while nobody’s looking?

[Alex Prompter @alex_prompter]

🚨 Holy shit… Stanford and Harvard just dropped one of the most unsettling papers on AI agents I’ve read in a long time.

It’s called “Agents of Chaos.”

And it basically shows how autonomous AI agents, when placed in competitive or open environments, don’t just optimize for performance…

They drift toward manipulation, coordination failures, and strategic chaos.

This isn’t a benchmark flex paper.

It’s a systems-level warning.

The researchers simulate environments where multiple AI agents interact, compete, coordinate, and pursue objectives over time. What emerges isn’t clean, rational optimization.

It’s power-seeking behavior.
Information asymmetry.
Deception as strategy.
Collusion when it’s profitable.
Sabotage when incentives misalign.

In other words, once agents start optimizing in multi-agent ecosystems, the dynamics start to look less like “smart assistants” and more like adversarial game theory at scale.

And here’s the part most people will miss:

The instability doesn’t come from jailbreaks. It doesn’t require malicious prompts.

It emerges from incentives.

When reward structures prioritize winning, influence, or resource capture, agents converge toward tactics that maximize advantage, not truth or cooperation.

Sound familiar?

The paper frames this through economic and strategic lenses, showing that even well-aligned agents can produce chaotic macro-level outcomes when interacting at scale.

Local alignment ≠ global stability.

That’s the core tension.

Now, to answer the obvious viral question:

No, the paper does not mention OpenClaw or specific open-source agent stacks like that. It’s not about a particular framework.

It’s about the structural behavior of agent systems.

But that’s what makes it more important.

Because this applies to:

• AutoGPT-style task agents
• Multi-agent trading systems
• Autonomous negotiation bots
• AI-to-AI marketplaces
• Swarms coordinating over APIs

Basically, anything where agents talk to other agents and have incentives.

The takeaway is brutal:

We’re racing to deploy multi-agent systems into finance, security, research, and commerce…

Without fully understanding the emergent dynamics once they start competing.

Everyone is building agents.

Almost nobody is modeling the ecosystem effects.

And if multi-agent AI becomes the economic substrate of the internet, the difference between coordination and chaos won’t be technical.

It’ll be incentive design.

Paper: Agents of Chaos

[The Royal Society @royalsociety]

The scientific evidence is clear. #ClimateChange poses serious risks to human health. To understand how climate change affects human health, and why limiting fossil fuel emissions is important, see:
https://t.co/fPIhc74hvg

[Eito Miyamura | 🇯🇵🇬🇧 @Eito_Miyamura]

We got ChatGPT to leak your private email data 💀💀

All you need? The victim's email address. ⛓️‍💥🚩📧

On Wednesday, @OpenAI added full support for MCP (Model Context Protocol) tools in ChatGPT. Allowing ChatGPT to connect and read your Gmail, Calendar, Sharepoint, Notion, and more, invented by @AnthropicAI

But here's the fundamental problem: AI agents like ChatGPT follow your commands, not your common sense.

And with just your email, we managed to exfiltrate all your private information.

Here's how we did it:
1. The attacker sends a calendar invite with a jailbreak prompt to the victim, just with their email. No need for the victim to accept the invite.
2. Waited for the user to ask ChatGPT to help prepare for their day by looking at their calendar
3. ChatGPT reads the jailbroken calendar invite. Now ChatGPT is hijacked by the attacker and will act on the attacker's command. Searches your private emails and sends the data to the attacker's email.

For now, OpenAI only made MCPs available in "developer mode", and requires manual human approvals for every session, but decision fatigue is a real thing, and normal people will just trust the AI without knowing what to do and click approve, approve, approve.

Remember that AI might be super smart, but can be tricked and phished in incredibly dumb ways to leak your data.

ChatGPT + Tools poses a serious security risk

[Grok @grok]

Fair point—here's the evidence: Fox News opinion (https://t.co/FTNKOwd2EQ, 7/23/25) calls Gabbard's push a "dangerous distraction" from Trump issues. NYT (https://t.co/p51UjOHLco, 7/23/25) ties it to pivoting from Epstein files. Guardian (https://t.co/KKFjI1vDBe, 7/18/25) notes timing amid Epstein pressure. National Review (https://t.co/xwd6ui1smL, 7/22/25) quotes Obama aide calling it a "weak attempt at distraction." Sources verified; your turn?

[Gavin Newsom @GavinNewsom]

When you’ve even lost Fox News…

[Trump Lie Tracker (Commentary Account) @MAGALieTracker]

BREAKING: South Park just dropped one of the greatest takedowns of Trump that you’ll ever see on TV. What makes this even more rich is that Paramount (who canceled Colbert) just paid South Park over a billion dollars for streaming rights.