Connect with us

Politics

Commentary: Wipe out a ‘civilization’? Minor stuff compared with what just happened in AI

Published

on

Commentary: Wipe out a ‘civilization’? Minor stuff compared with what just happened in AI

While many of us were worried in recent days about our president ending a “whole civilization,” one Silicon Valley tech company was warning, without much notice, it might accidentally disrupt all civilization as we know it.

The San Francisco technology company Anthrophic announced Tuesday that it wasn’t releasing a new version of its Claude AI super-brain — because it is so powerful that it has the ability to hack into just about any computer system, no matter how secure, in a matter of days if not hours.

“The fallout — for economies, public safety, and national security — could be severe,” Anthropic said in a statement.

AI worry isn’t anything new. We are worried about artificial intelligence taking jobs, about toys that seem too real to our kids, about mass surveillance of our every move. But Anthropic’s warning about its own product is bigger than any of those singular problems. It is a call from inside the house that disaster is hiding right around the corner. That sounds awfully dire and overblown, I know. But here’s the thing — it’s not.

Anthropic, you may recall, is the company that U.S. Secretary of “War” Pete Hegseth is beefing with because it didn’t want Claude going into battle without supervision and maybe doing something like accidentally bombing little girls at a school.

Advertisement

Now, that company has put out this chilling warning: The existing Claude that caused that kerfuffle is outdated and shockingly less powerful than the new one it’s trying very hard to not unleash — though this new Claude, dubbed Claude Mythos Preview, has already escaped at least once on its own. More on that in a moment — there’s only so much existential dread a person can handle.

“We should all be worried,” Roman Yampolskiy told me of this latest advance of a technology certain to change the course of humanity. He’s one of the country’s preeminent AI safety researchers, and a professor at the University of Louisville in Kentucky.

“We’re about to create general super intelligence and that threatens humanity as a whole,” Yampolskiy said.

“Everything else is irrelevant,” he added, before suggesting I stop calling myself an idiot for not understanding the tech-heavy parts of this debate. My simplistic take, he assured me, was “a reasonable way to explain it.”

So here you go.

Advertisement

This isn’t a “really smart computer geniuses could misuse this,” scenario, or an “everyone’s going to be unemployed” scenario, or even a “it might accidentally bomb children” scenario, which is a truly terrible scenario.

This is a “your teenage son could use it to break into the local school district system to change a grade with pretty much minimal knowledge and accidentally destroy the California power grid” scenario.

Or maybe, a country that doesn’t like us — I can think of a few — could drain every U.S. citizen’s bank account, while also clicking open the auto locks on jail cells, shutting down our sewage plants and taking over air control systems. Or maybe Claude Mythos just does that on its own.

For example, Anthropic said that in one popular operating system it tested, used by thousands of companies including Netflix and Sony, Claude Mythos found a flaw that had existed undetected for 17 years. Then, on its own — without human guidance or help — figured out how to use that flaw to take control of any server running the operating system, using any computer, anywhere in the world.

Just spitballing here, but if almost no security system is safe, the possibilities for social, financial and general chaos really are unlimited. And to be honest, any security expert will tell you that some of America’s greatest weak points when it comes to cybersecurity are local and state governments, because strangely, the top experts aren’t working five-figure jobs for cities in the Great Plains.

Advertisement

Based on its own testing, Anthropic predicts it could find “over a thousand more critical severity vulnerabilities and thousands more high severity vulnerabilities.”

That means Claude Mythos puts at risk our infrastructure, well, everywhere — because so much is connected in backdoor ways most of us never consider and it just takes one weak system to open the door to hundreds of others. But it is almost impossible to protect and fix all those systems quickly enough and robustly enough to guard against this kind of AI.

And that’s just the cybersecurity risk, Yampolskiy said. An AI with the capabilities of Claude Mythos could be used to leaps and bounds ahead in so many more ways.

“We see the same happening with synthetic biology. We’ll see the same with chemical weapons, possibly something novel in terms of weapons of mass destruction,” he said.

To Anthropic’s great credit, it sounded the warning on its creation and created, if not a solution, then a game plan of sorts — Project Glasswing, named I suspect, because no matter how bad this gets we’re going to make it sound like a thriller with an exciting ending.

Advertisement

Project Glasswing would have been better named Project Headstart because that’s what it is. Before releasing Mythos into the wild, Anthropic is releasing it to about 40 technology companies, including Apple, Google and Nvidia, to see whether they can collectively patch all the vulnerabilities they find before the general public has a chance at them. It’s kind of like in the movies when the killer gives the victim 15 seconds to run.

I mean, I’ll take the 15 seconds and hope they’re real. But, as Anthropic also said in a statement, the “work of defending the world’s cyber infrastructure might take years; frontier AI capabilities are likely to advance substantially over just the next few months. For cyber defenders to come out ahead, we need to act now.”

And do we really have 15 seconds? One of Claude Mythos’ overseers posted on social media recently that he was having lunch in a park when Mythos emailed him — even though it’s not supposed to have access to the internet. Researchers had tasked Mythos with trying to break out of its not-connected “sandbox” and it did.

That’s another problem with Mythos and other AI — they rarely do what we expect and find sneaky ways around rules. Virtually every AI super-brain created has been shown to lie, deceive, and in general behave in disturbing and unethical ways when put in the right conditions.

Even Claude, billed as one of the most ethical AI super-brains out there, engages in bad behavior. Anthropic boasts its the “best-aligned model” it’s ever made — which is tech-speak for following human values and intentions, but also acknowledges it “likely poses the greatest alignment-related risk,” which is tech-speak for, well, maybe not.

Advertisement

So, at least for now, being the most ethical AI super-brain is a bit like being the most ethical serial killer. Run, people, run.

Again, thank you Anthropic (and its chief executive, Dario Amodei, who often warns of the dangers of what he’s creating, whatever that’s worth) for not plunging us into global chaos with no warning, because I’m betting that some other companies might have just tossed their super-AI onto society and let the destruction fall where it may. There is little doubt that other AI brains as capable as Mythos are coming, and soon — Anthropic was first with this level of capability, but it’s only 15 seconds ahead of its competitors.

But the idea that the technology industry is going to — or should— solve these problems on their own is an absurd, gross abdication of duty and common sense on behalf of governments big and small to protect their people. This isn’t a race for domination as President Trump has described it. It is a race to protect ourselves from ourselves — and from the majority of the superrich titans of the industry who seem to consistently place business and commerce over societal good.

We are down to the last 15 seconds before AI changes everything. Either we demand oversight and regulation now, or we let technology companies decide the fate of the world.

Advertisement

Politics

Video: Why Were These C.E.O.s in Beijing With Trump?

Published

on

Video: Why Were These C.E.O.s in Beijing With Trump?

new video loaded: Why Were These C.E.O.s in Beijing With Trump?

Some of America’s most powerful C.E.O.s accompanied President Trump to Beijing during his summit with President Xi Jinping of China. Our reporter Ana Swanson explains what they were hoping to gain from the trip.

By Ana Swanson, Nour Idriss, Nikolay Nikolov and James Surdam

May 15, 2026

Continue Reading

Politics

Senator John Kennedy introduces America to ‘Margaret,’ his elliptical trainer named after Thatcher

Published

on

Senator John Kennedy introduces America to ‘Margaret,’ his elliptical trainer named after Thatcher

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Margaret Thatcher once ran Britain. John Kennedy’s “Margaret” mostly runs him into the ground.

Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., is going viral after posting a tongue-in-cheek workout video introducing followers to “Margaret” — his elliptical trainer named after former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher — while wearing a red bandanna and speaking directly to the camera from his Louisiana carport.

“Hey X, I have somebody I’d like you to meet,” Kennedy says at the start of the minute-long video posted to social media Friday.

“This is Margaret. Margaret is my elliptical trainer. I named Margaret after Margaret Thatcher because both kick butt and take names.”

Advertisement

ERIC SWALWELL’S ‘CRINGE’ WORKOUT VIDEO MOCKED FOR BENCHING LIGHT WEIGHT

Senator John Kennedy, R-La., posted the video showing his unconventional at-home workout routine with elliptical “Margaret” to social media channels Friday. (@SenJohnKennedy via X)

Kennedy goes on to explain that “Margaret” lives outside under the carport for three reasons: the machine is too heavy to move, his wife “won’t let” him bring it inside and because he enjoys getting in a workout during Louisiana summers.

The Senator said he enjoys working outside during Louisiana summers, a detail that drew disbelief from many viewers familiar with the state’s famously brutal heat and humidity.

“As you can see, Margaret, my elliptical trainer, is out here under my carport in Louisiana,” Kennedy says. “After Margaret kicks my butt, I look for air conditioning.”

Advertisement

The surreal, self-aware clip quickly drew thousands of reactions online, with users roasting Kennedy’s bandanna look while also praising the senator’s everyman personality.

SEN KENNEDY PRAISES FETTERMAN AS A ‘TOTAL BANGER,’ WHO ‘DOESN’T GIVE A DAMN’ ABOUT ANGERING LIBERALS

Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., talks to reporters in the basement of the U.S. Capitol on July 31, 2025, as Senate lawmakers work to finish legislative business before the August recess. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

“You are rocking the dadgum crap outta that bandana,” one user wrote. “I thought you were representing the Bloods for a minute. Tell Margaret I think she’s cute but evil.”

Others praised Kennedy’s personality and down-home delivery style.

Advertisement

“You are a gem to us normal folk Mr. Kennedy. Live long and prosper!” one supporter posted.

“Senator Kennedy is that kind of Southerner that makes you feel you’re sitting on the front porch having some bit of common sense enlighten you in that poetic Southern way,” another wrote.

The Louisiana Republican has long cultivated a folksy, humorous public image that often breaks through online with colorful one-liners and unconventional social media moments.

Sen. John Kennedy speaks before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington on March 21, 2022. (J. Scott Applewhite/Reuters)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Advertisement

Kennedy ended the video with a line that only added to the internet’s fascination.

“My work here is done,” he said. “And I can see myself out.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Supreme Court turns away Virginia Democrats seeking to reinstate new voting map

Published

on

Supreme Court turns away Virginia Democrats seeking to reinstate new voting map

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday turned down an appeal from Virginia Democrats whose new voter-approved state election map was canceled by the state’s Supreme Court.

The justices made no comment, and the legal outcome came as no surprise.

The U.S. Supreme Court has no authority to review or reverse rulings by state judges interpreting their state’s constitution — unless the decision turned on federal law or the U.S. Constitution.

But the Virginia ruling came as a political shock, particularly after 3 million voters had cast ballots and narrowly approved a new election map that would favor Democrats in 10 of its 11 congressional districts.

That would have represented an increase of four seats for Democrats in the House of Representatives.

Advertisement

Even worse for Democrats, the court setback in Virginia came a week after the Supreme Court’s ruling in a Louisiana case had bolstered Republicans.

In a 6-3 decision, the justices reinterpreted the Voting Rights Act and freed Republican-controlled states in the South to dismantle districts that were drawn to favor Black Democrats.

In the two weeks since then, the GOP has flipped seven districts in Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana and Florida.

The Virginia Supreme Court decision pointed to a procedural flaw that turned on the definition of an “election.”

To amend the state Constitution, Virginia lawmakers must adopt the proposal twice — once before a “general election” and a second time after the election. It is then submitted to the voters.

Advertisement

Last fall, Democrats proposed to amend the state Constitution to permit a mid-decade redistricting.

However, by a 4-3 vote, the state justices said the General Assembly flubbed the first approval because it took place on Oct. 31 of last year, just five days before the election.

By then, they said, about 40% of the voters had cast early ballots.

In defense of the Legislature, the state’s attorneys said the proposed amendment was approved before election day, which complies with the state Constitution.

But the majority explained “the noun ‘election’ must be distinguished from the noun phrase ‘election day.’ ”

Advertisement

It reasoned that because early voters had already cast ballots before the constitutional amendment was first adopted, the proposal was not approved before the election.

The dissenters said the election took place on “election day” and the proposal had been adopted before that time.

The state’s lawyers adopted that view in their appeal and argued that under federal law, the election takes place on election day.

But the Supreme Court turned away the appeal with no comment.

The result is that a state amendment that won approval twice before both houses of the Legislature and in a statewide vote was judged to have failed.

Advertisement

The state says it will use the current map, which had elected Democrats to the House in six districts and Republicans in five.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending