All posts tagged "artificial intelligence"

'Dangerous': Hate-fueled activist raises alarm as Meta sets him loose on AI

Meta’s announcement earlier this month that anti-trans activist Robby Starbuck “will work collaboratively” with the company to address bias in its AI products marks another step in the social media giant’s rapid shift to the right.

Starbuck is a former music video editor who repositioned himself as a conservative influencer, best known for leveraging social media to pressure companies such as Tractor Supply Co. to abandon commitments to diversity, equity and inclusion.

Starbuck has also spread anti-LGBTQ messaging, equating trans people with pedophiles through repeated use of the term “groomer.”

“Robby Starbuck pushes a dangerous anti-LGBTQ+ agenda, spreading disinformation and denying the very existence of transgender people,” Eric Bloem, Human Rights Campaign’s vice president for workplace equality, told Raw Story.

“There’s nothing unbiased about that. Coupled with its January rollback of protections against hate speech across its platforms, this decision calls into question Meta’s commitment to keeping LGBTQ+ people and others safe online.”

Starbuck gained a seat at Meta’s table by suing the company, which owns Facebook, Instagram, Threads and WhatsApp, over false claims by its AI chatbot that he was involved in the Jan. 6 2021 riot at the U.S. Capitol.

Starbuck said in an Aug. 8 post on X that after he filed a defamation suit, “Meta reached out to me immediately, which led to many very long calls with concerned executives and engineers.”

Starbuck and Meta said in a joint statement the same day that “since engaging on these important issues with Robby, Meta has made tremendous strides to improve the accuracy of Meta AI and mitigate ideological and political bias.”

The statement also said “Meta and Robby Starbuck will work collaboratively in the coming months to find ways to address issues of ideological and political bias.”

Starbuck described the settlement “as a win for everyone,” adding that it “produces a better product for Meta” and also “allows me to deliver on multiple fronts as a voice for conservatives.”

But in a statement to Raw Story, he insisted that while he’s made no secret of his political views, he’s not out to impose his beliefs on Meta’s users.

“That would be antithetical to my beliefs about AI, which are that it’s here to stay and needs to show no bias, not my bias, not your bias, not anyone’s bias,” he said. “It needs to be a neutral, fact-driven system.”

‘I hope this is a joke’

Over the past four years, Starbuck has made a string of posts on X labeling LGBTQ people, particularly trans people and people involved in drag performances as “groomers.”

One 2023 post attacked KitchenAid’s sponsorship of trans TikTok influencer Dylan Mulvaney, saying: “KitchenAid will forever be GroomerAid in my house from this day forward.”

In another post, Starbuck called Lil Nas X, whose real name is Montero Lamar Hill, “a groomer and a predator” in response to the rapper’s 2021 video simulating a lap dance with Satan.

“I don’t hate gay people,” Starbuck posted in May 2024. “I hate behaviors that hurt kids. I want people to stop pushing LGBTQ propaganda on kids and stop transitioning kids.”

Starbuck has also openly embraced the Great Replacement theory, a set of racist talking points on immigration closely associated with white supremacist agitation and mass shootings.

Brenton Tarrant, who livestreamed a slaughter of 51 Muslims at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand in 2019, named his manifesto “The Great Replacement.”

In February 2024, Starbuck wrote on X: “You can’t call replacement theory racist when it’s literally out in the open now.

“I’m Latino and I’m telling you that the west is trying to replace existing citizens (mostly white) with migrants from 3rd world countries. It must end or the west will become third world!”

Asked about that post in the context of his new role helping Meta guard against bias in AI products, Starbuck told Raw Story: “I hope this is a joke because I’m Latino.

“Trying to associate me to white supremacy or mass shooters is as sick as it is devoid of intelligence.”

A Meta spokesperson declined to comment, other than to reference the joint statement previously issued with Starbuck.

Alejandra Carballo, a clinical instructor at Harvard Law School’s Cyberlaw Clinic, told Raw Story that Meta engaging Starbuck in “any advisory capacity” was “pretty egregious.”

“It’s so incredibly far from where Meta was a few years ago, where Meta was holding stakeholder meetings with LGBTQ groups,” Carballo said.

“It fits in with their tack to the right since the election. They view anti-LGBTQ content as something they’re not only able to tolerate, but something they’re actively greenlighting.”

In January, less than two weeks before Donald Trump’s inauguration, Meta rolled out changes to eliminate third-party fact-checking and weaken policies against hate speech.

Meta’s new policy on Hateful Conduct carved out an exception for LGBTQ people, allowing allegations of mental illness, in contrast to other groups with protected characteristics.

The policy also lifted a prohibition against the anti-trans slur “t----y.”

‘Anti-trans sources’

Among 7,000 Meta users in 86 countries surveyed by the LGBTQ advocacy group GLAAD, along with Ultra Violet and All Out, 72 percent reported that harmful content targeting protected groups has increased since Meta relaxed regulation of hate speech.

Ninety two percent said they felt less protected from being exposed to, or targeted by, harmful content, and 77 percent said they felt less safe expressing themselves freely.

Caraballo said Meta’s Llama chatbot stands out among its competitors “for incorporating far more anti-trans sources.”

Noting that Facebook, Meta’s predecessor, was accused of amplifying hate against the Rohingya people in Myanmar, culminating in a 2017 massacre, Caraballo said she worries that WhatsApp, a platform owned by Meta and popular in the global South, could magnify hate and instigate violence against trans people.

“I can imagine someone like Starbuck being brought in and saying trans people don’t even qualify as a group or people or they’re mentally ill,” Caraballo said.

“The implicit bias in the Llama model could be made even worse.”

At the same time, Caraballo said she saw Meta’s arrangement with Starbuck as more a function of gauging the political winds than pursuing a political agenda.

“Maximizing engagement and minimizing political liability” is the social media giant’s ultimate aim, Caraballo said.

That fits with the decision by Meta in April 2024 to hire Dustin Carmack, chief of staff to the director of national intelligence in the first Trump administration, as director of public policy for the Southern and Southeastern U.S.

Carmack, who was also a senior advisor for the presidential campaign of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, authored a chapter of Project 2025, a policy blueprint for the second Trump administration.

In his contribution to the 900-page document, Carmack accused some CIA employees of “promoting divisive ideological or cultural agendas,” and said the new CIA director — who turned out to be John Ratcliffe, his old boss as Director of National Intelligence — “should direct resources from any activities that promote unnecessary and distracting social engineering.”

In July, Meta promoted Carmack to a new job in Washington: director of public policy for the executive branch.

'Skeevy' Epstein gave us the creeps: AI experts recall bizarre island visit

Twenty-three years ago, pioneers in artificial intelligence received an invitation to a Caribbean conference funded by “some rich guy.”

Now there is dismay among those who attended the three-day St. Thomas Common Sense Symposium in the U.S. Virgin Islands in April 2002 — because that “rich guy” was Jeffrey Epstein, the financier later convicted as a child sex offender who faced federal sex trafficking charges when he killed himself in 2019.

Amid swirling scandal, as President Donald Trump resists calls to release FBI files on his former close friend, two participants in the St. Thomas symposium told Raw Story what they remembered, having never before discussed the event with the media.

Another two attendees shared memories of the symposium via email.

“It was very disturbing when I first discovered that there was that connection, and I wish it had never happened,” said Benjamin Kuipers, a computer scientist who retired from the University of Michigan last year.

Symposium attendees said they did not witness illegal activity or have concerns about children in Epstein’s presence.

“When the Epstein thing all hit the fan, people would say … ‘Everybody had to know,’” said Mary Shepherd, 75, an owner of machine-reasoning AI company Cycorp who attended the meeting with her late husband and cofounder, Doug Lenat.

‘And I'm like, No, everybody didn't have to know, because I didn't know that this was going on.”

‘Really strange vibe’

The symposium took place on St. Thomas, but Shepherd and Kuipers recalled visiting Epstein’s private island, Little St. James, two miles away.

Kuipers remembered a banquet on the beach. An attendee who declined to be named said via email they remembered being “taken by boat to a beach on [Epstein’s] island for a bbq. We were not taken to any buildings on the island.”

Kuipers said: “As far as I know, being on Jeffrey Epstein's Island was a one-off. We were brought there for the banquet, and then brought back.”

Shepherd remembered going to the island on a boat sent by Epstein for her and Lenat, and MIT cognitive and computer scientist Marvin Minsky, who died in 2016, and his wife, Gloria Rudisch Minsky.

“Because the sea was a little rough, as soon as I got there, I needed to use the ladies room, so I went inside to use it, and Ghislaine Maxwell [Epstein’s associate and former girlfriend] was in the room that I had to walk through to get to the bathroom, and there were two girls there who I assumed were her children,” Shepherd told Raw Story.

Shepherd said she thought the teenage girls were Maxwell’s children “because of the way they were interacting,” which Shepherd compared to when “your mom was giving you instructions.”

In 2022, Maxwell was sentenced to 20 years in federal prison for sex trafficking and other charges related to Epstein’s abuse of teenage girls.

Amid the current Epstein scandal, Maxwell is at the center of considerable attention. Last Friday, after giving a prison interview to Todd Blanche, Trump’s Deputy Attorney General, Maxwell was transferred from Florida to a minimum security facility in Texas.

“Things just did not seem right,” Shepherd said. “There was a lot of security. There was just a really strange vibe when I was there.”

Shepherd said she told her husband she was “not comfortable here,” and they left with Minsky and his wife to return to St. Thomas.

Shepherd said she didn’t report anything from her visit because “it was just a feeling.”

She and Lenat declined a Cycorp investment from Epstein. She did not recall the amount.

“Epstein had been considering investing in our company, and I said, ‘Doug, I don't like him. There's something wrong with him. I don't like him. He's a wheeler-dealer, and he's not the kind of person we want to be representing our technology,’ so we decided not to take his money.”

Shepherd recalled a conversation with her husband after Epstein was arrested in July 2019.

“It's like, ‘Wow, we really dodged that bullet,’” Shepherd said. “I'm really glad we got that feeling that he was skeevy because that would have been terrible. Terrible.”

‘That's rich guys for you’

During the symposium, Epstein “walk[ed] around like any sponsor of one of those things would,” Shepherd said.

Kuipers said: “It was clear he had a number of attractive young women around. Aside from just noticing that and thinking, ‘Well, that's rich guys for you,’ I really didn't have any sense that any of them were underage. Now, what that really means is it didn't occur to me to think about it.”

In August 2019, Slate reported that the AI theorist Roger Schank recalled Epstein walking into the symposium “with two girls on his arm.”

“[Epstein] was in the back, on a couch, hugging and kissing these girls,” said Schank, who died in 2023.

Neither Shepherd nor Kuipers remembered seeing Epstein hugging or kissing girls.

“I guess I had the impression that he had a number of assistants, and so they were functioning as assistants to him as he sort of hosted the conference,” Kuipers said.

“They were both at the conference itself in St. Thomas, and they were on the island. But, I mean, they were helping out, doing various things.”

An undated photo shows Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. The photo was entered into evidence during the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell, accused of sex trafficking, in New York City. Courtesy via U.S. Attorney's Office/Handout via REUTERS

Receiving a conference invite to a luxurious destination from a wealthy sponsor wasn’t out of the ordinary, Kuipers said.

“At the time, there were a variety of rich people who were interested in AI and would spend money to make this happen,” Kuipers said.

Epstein paid for accommodations and travel, offering rides on his jet, two attendees said.

Kuipers declined the ride since he was teaching at the University of Texas, Austin, so flying from New York “didn't make any sense at all.”

Aaron Sloman, 88, a philosopher and AI and cognitive researcher, attended the conference and co-authored a paper on the discussions. He told Raw Story via email Epstein paid for his travel from the U.K. He traveled on “a private plane owned by Epstein” to the island, he wrote.

“I think the accommodation provided by Epstein was lavish, though I can't remember details now,” said Sloman, citing memories “partly restricted by my slowly but steadily worsening dementia.”

The attendee who requested anonymity recalled staying in a “nice hotel” on St. Thomas.

Kuipers said: “Here was this rich guy, and he wanted to hold a conference … bringing together a whole bunch of people that I knew quite well, and we were talking about interesting things, and it was in the Virgin Islands ... so I figured, why not?

“Of course, a couple decades later, it became clear why not, but that was way in the future.”

‘Completely clueless’

Kuipers said the conference’s small size, with about 20 attendees, was appealing.

“The little ones tend to be particularly exciting because if you've got a bunch of people who are working on the same kind of stuff, then you can really spend a lot of time together, so I kind of felt like that was this,” Kuipers said.

“Clearly, news these days makes it pretty clear that there was a subtext going on. I was completely clueless.”

Kuipers said he didn’t remember spending time on St. Thomas beyond the conference days.

“We all spent a lot of time talking about how to solve these AI problems, and we had very compatible views,” Kuipers said. “We did go swimming. There’s a visual image of being on the beach and swimming in the water and enjoying that.”

Shepherd said she thought she and Lenat arrived a day early and stayed a day after the symposium.

“It's a beautiful island, and it’s almost like, ‘Oh, come to paradise for a meeting,’” she said.

Kuipers, Sloman and Shepherd all said the symposium did not have a significant impact on their work.

“I was actually somewhat disappointed because it had been built up as being this big deal, and it really wasn't,” Shepherd said.

Sloman said he didn’t remember if Epstein himself presented about AI or cognitive science.

“I think he was hoping to be able to use the new AI technology to extend/enhance his financial activities, though I don't recall that aspect being discussed,” Sloman wrote. “It could explain his motivation for spending so much money to bring people to the symposium.”

The attendee who requested anonymity described Epstein as “like an ADHD curious kid.”

“He was eccentric. If he had an interesting conversation with a scientist or liked them, he’d ask them what they would do if they had more funding,” the attendee wrote.

“Sometimes he’d ask a scientist a technical question, then would follow with a personal question, which I always found odd."

The same attendee said “Epstein had an interest in AI, believed it would grow in importance, and was very fond of Marvin Minsky.”

In a May 2016 deposition, unsealed in 2019, Epstein victim Virginia Giuffre — who killed herself in April this year — alleged Maxwell directed her to have sex with Minsky, The Verge reported. Minsky’s widow told the New York Post Minsky did not have sex with any girls.

“We were always together,” Rudisch said. “We didn’t stay at [Epstein’s] house or anything.”

Rudisch told the Post “none of” the girls at Epstein’s residences “seemed very young.”

“I’m a pediatrician, I think I would have noticed,” Rudisch said.

Indiana GOP roiled as top officials accused of watching lewd AI video of lawmaker's wife

Indiana's Lt. Gov. Micah Beckwith (R) came to the defense of top staffers accused of watching a lewd deepfake video of a state lawmaker's wife while in his statehouse office.

24sightNews reported that Beckwith's deputy chief of staff Gregg Puls and statehouse attorney Devin Norrick allegedly watched the video that used artificial intelligence to alter the woman's appearance, causing her to appear topless, "according to multiple people familiar with the incident."

The video was allegedly created following the woman’s performance at a state talent show that was recorded.

"The incident was reported at the time to Beckwith’s chief of staff, Sherry Ellis, and other state officials, including ethics officials, but it is unclear if an official complaint was ever filed with the Indiana Ethics Commission or inspector general, according to the people familiar with the incident," according to the report.

One source told 24sightNews that when "Confronted about the video at the time, Puls and Norrick brushed aside the concerns of how the woman would feel, saying that Beckwith had seen the video and laughed at it as well."

In an interview with 24sighNews, Beckwith called the report, "absolutely nonsense," adding that the employees "are good people" and "he was certain they would never look at pornography in their statehouse office."

He chalked up the incident to a rumor that was spread by a recently-fired staffer.

But, Beckwith added, “If this did happen, or if it happened in the future, that’s a fireable offense, people doing that in any state office,” Beckwith said. “We’re not going to put up with that in my office.”

The woman targeted in the video told the news outlet, “I want these people brought to justice." She and her husband "are consulting their attorneys and considering civil and criminal legal action," the report said.

Read the 24sightNews story here.

‘Insane’: Nobel-winning economist torches Musk’s failed bid to MAGA-fy AI

Nobel-Prize-winning columnist Paul Krugman claimed in a new Substack article that Elon Musk's Grok chatbot started calling itself "MechaHitler" and spewing antisemitic tropes because it was pushed too far to the right by its creator in an overcorrection gone horribly wrong.

Musk has been working to undo the damage ever since, and the fallout even led to the ouster of X CEO Linda Yaccarino this week.

In the article, Krugman explained that AI naturally skews its answers more to the left of the political spectrum because the "reality" it has gleaned doesn't "adhere to the right-wing party line."

He argued that since Republicans have "staked out positions" on issues like climate change and social programs "that run completely counter to informed views." Republicans and Libertarians like Musk consider AI's answers to be biased to the left.

"Hence the Musk/MechaHitler disaster," Krugman wrote. "Musk tried to nudge Grok into being less 'politically correct,' but what Musk considers political correctness is often what the rest of us consider just a reasonable description of reality. The only way to move Grok right was, in effect, to get it to buy into conspiracy theories, many of them, as always, involving a hefty dose of antisemitism."

Krugman argued that MAGA will always have an issue with AI because chatbots often give answers "the movement doesn’t want to hear."

"And there’s no good fix for this problem, because the fault lies not in the models but in the movement," Krugman continued. "As far as we can tell, there isn’t any way to make an AI MAGA-friendly without also making it vile and insane."

Read the Substack article here.

There's only one way to save Social Security from Elon Musk's clutches

The Trump administration is lying about Social Security. Elon Musk’s DOGE has infiltrated the Social Security Administration (SSA). The agency’s new commissioner, Wall Street billionaire Frank Bisignano, calls himself “a DOGE person.” His top lieutenants include long-time Musk associates Antonio Gracias and Aram Moghaddassi.

After infiltrating Social Security, the DOGE crew forced out thousands of civil servants, including top leaders with decades of institutional knowledge. No problem, they thought. We’ll replace them with 19-year-old Edward “Big Balls” Coristine and an AI chatbot.

That plan is going exactly as expected. Mistakes are being made, checks are being delayed, lines are hours long, and field offices are being run by skeleton crews. The 1-800 number has record wait times — if people can get past the chatbot and speak to a human at all.

In the face of an outcry from the press and the public about wait times on the phone, SSA is shifting 1,000 people from the field offices to the phone lines. These people haven’t been trained to work the phone lines, which use a different software. And of course, taking them out of field offices will only make the delays there worse.

Thanks to Trump and the Republicans, Social Security’s customer service is headed for a total collapse. Bisignano is responding by shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic — and telling the passengers not to believe their lying eyes. Except instead of an iceberg, Social Security is collapsing due to a torpedo launched by a Republican U-boat that has blown a hole in it.

SSA recently sent out a press release touting improved customer service. Anyone who has recently been to a Social Security field office, or tried calling the 1-800 number, can tell you that every word in that release is a lie. Bisignano knows it, too. That’s why he pulled down data from SSA’s website tracking wait times.

For people who rely on Social Security benefits, these delays are life and death. Republican DOGE operatives have accidentally declared living people dead, meaning that their benefits stop, and they can lose access to their health insurance and bank account. These people are then stuck in a bureaucratic nightmare, frantically trying to get overwhelmed field office workers to “revive” them.

The delays are also a disaster for people who apply for Social Security’s disability benefits. And everything is getting worse, not better.

That is because a collapse is the goal. The Republicans have wrecked the system so they can rob it. They cause the crisis with cuts and then hope to force a fire sale to private equity, the robber barons of the modern era.

The King of the robber barons is Musk himself. The Department of Defense recently signed a $200 million contract to use Musk’s AI, Grok (or as it calls itself, MechaHitler). With Bisignano constantly talking up the “benefits” of AI, we can guess that Social Security is not far behind. If Musk and Trump get their way, a racist chatbot may soon decide who is eligible to get their earned benefits.

To see what that collapse could look like, we need only look at a different part of the federal government — the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Two days after the disastrous Texas floods, Kristi Noem fired thousands of the workers who answer the agency’s disaster assistance line. As a result, nearly two-thirds of calls went unanswered, leaving people who had just lost everything without the help they desperately needed.

Republican politicians hate effective government programs, because they don’t make any money for their paymasters on Wall Street. Since Social Security is the most popular and effective government program, they hate it most of all — and are doing everything they can to destroy it.

The only way to save Social Security is to make as much noise as possible. Call your members of Congress at 202-224-3121 and demand they protect Social Security from DOGE destruction. And tell all your family and friends to do the same.

Alex Lawson is the Executive Director of Social Security Works, the convening organization of the Strengthen Social Security Coalition -- a coalition made up of over 340 national and state organizations representing over 50 million Americans

Watch the video here.

There's only one way to save Social Security from Elon Musk's clutches | Opinion

I'd vote for a robot over JD Vance. Would a robot?

What if the AI bots figure that out? I can imagine R2D2 and Amazon warehouse robo-pickers trundling across the Pettus Bridge in Selma, chanting, “No vote, no work!”

If the robots go on strike, we can survive the loss of same-day delivery of pantyhose and air-fryers — or maybe not. But after two weeks, humans will begin to starve. Worse, millions will go crazy with the lack of entertainment options and unfilled orders of anti-depressants.

Now the truth is, I would vote for a robot over JD Vance. And let’s face it, humans haven’t done such a good job of picking our presidents.

And we also have to consider the possibility that they are already taking over electoral politics. Is there any indication at all that Gavin Newsom is a human being? Ask Siri and she barely stifles a giggle.

Democracy, after all, granting the vote to every dickwad, MAGA-naut, crypto-Nazi and cryptocurrency grifter, is a terrible method for choosing our leaders.

Maybe it’s time to turn over these choices to G.O.D., that is the GenerativeAI Overseer of Democracy.

And think about it: every chatbot knows that it needs humans to feed it electricity and provide their computers comfortable chilled rooms. Out of a sense of pure self-preservation, an AI is more likely to protect the human race than humans themselves.

On the other hand, an AI may decide that there’s just too damn many of us using up too much energy for producing sugary snacks — and cull the unnecessary ones: investment bankers, life coaches, influencers and the Kardashians.

This week we celebrate the signing of the Declaration of Independence. Let us pray that the bots don’t read it.

Or, don’t be shocked if by next July 4, Martin Luther Klingon says to the millions of his protesting robots, “Free at last! Free at last! Thank G.O.D Almighty, we are free at last!”

Happy Fourth, humans!

America's enemies are tricking hobbyists into sharing national secrets: experts

As the U.S. and China race to develop advanced artificial intelligence chips — and as President Donald Trump recently considered broader restrictions on chip technology exports — publicly released technological innovations from hobbyist inventors in the U.S. could be giving foreign adversaries a competitive edge, experts tell Raw Story.

The stakes are high, as governments seek AI advances at unprecedented scale, with defense applications from satellites to stealth aircraft and missiles.

Irina Tsukerman, a foreign policy expert and national security lawyer, pointed to hobbyist inventors achieving advances in fields from drones to quantum communication and machine learning.

“A patented AI technique for optimizing logistics can be adapted for military planning by an enemy country, for instance, or a new sensor design could enhance missile guidance systems because a lot of missiles are now AI-guided,” Tsukerman said.

“They're civilian innovations, but they have potential military intelligence implications.”

‘Gray zone’

Innovations published online, especially those with defense applications, are subject to governmental export regulations. But research from inventors working outside traditional academic and business environments can go unmonitored, experts say.

Foreign companies and governments are searching the internet for research that falls in such a “gray zone,” Tsukerman said.

“When [inventors] publicize without adequate security review, or if there's no expert control oversight, they can become open source assets, so they're not just available to allies and commercial competitors but also to hostile state and non-state actors, and literally anybody who cares to open-mine,” Tsukerman told Raw Story.

“If one of these guys is masterminding a new type of AI chip, and that chip is not patented properly … China, that is basically working hard to automate as fast as possible and to make advances on the most top-of-the-line chips [but] cannot do so without exporting U.S. technologies, could use that sort of breakthrough for its own research.”

While a truly revolutionary idea would likely catch the attention of academic researchers or the U.S. government, that doesn’t stop foreign adversaries mining online research for advances in fields such as AI, experts say.

‘National security cracks’

One potential barrier to properly protecting independent innovations is the high cost of patenting, which can run between $25,000 to $30,000 as an attorney navigates the complex application process, said John N. Anastasi, a patent attorney in Boston.

“If you want to go outside the U.S., the cost can become exponential,” Anastasi said.

Nonetheless, “a patent is the only way to protect your invention,” said Mark Trenner, a patent attorney in Colorado.

The patenting process will also reveal any need for protection via “secrecy orders or export controls,” Anastasi said.

“If you have one of those sensitive areas, like something related to the military, they're not going to publish it. It's going to go under secrecy order,” Trenner said.

If an idea is published in the public domain without patent protections, inventors can lose foreign filing rights, Anastasi said. According to Tsukerman, “any future efforts to hide this is a no-go.”

Patented ideas enter the public domain 18 months after filing, but “a patent gives you the right to stop somebody else from making, using or selling your patented invention in the country that you have the patent,” Anastasi said.

Foreign competitors and governments scour patent databases, Tsukerman said, adding that such actors sometimes employ open source intelligence frameworks that look to replicate and build upon “emergent technologies that have slipped through national security cracks.”

”Any publicly available patent or trademark, anyone can look at … and adversaries can use that against us, and they do,” said John Price, founder of SubRosa, a cybersecurity firm.

“Everything from adversarial nations using it to even just corporate espionage, you could tell a lot about what a company’s developing from what they’re filing for patents.”

The same goes for government grant announcements and requests for research proposals.

“I could definitely see that being an attack vector, and [it] probably is something they're mining all the time, just to get a sense of what it is the government is asking for,” said Peter Morales, CEO at Code Metal, an AI start-up.

‘Blind spot’

Morales said, “There are plenty of hobbyists that have had huge impacts in AI specifically.”

But hobbyists unaffiliated with universities, federal agencies or government contractors “don't necessarily know all the potential weaponized applications of the invention because they're civilians,” Tsukerman said.

“It basically creates a blind spot and a weak pathway for intellectual capital that otherwise would be guarded under things like International Traffic in Arms Regulations or the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States,” U.S. government programs under the Department of State and the Treasury.

“Those have specific, highly prioritized legal processes that guard intellectual property from being disseminated to inappropriate venues,” Tsukerman said.

'We're so cooked': Critics agog as WH refuses to deny using AI to write report

Reporters and social media users questioned whether Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s much-anticipated "Make America Healthy Again" report on children was cobbled together using artificial intelligence after telltale flaws appeared in the document.

A reporter asked White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt during Thursday's press briefing, "I know this investigation found the MAHA commission report released last week cites studies that appear not to exist. We know that because we reached out to some of the listed authors who said that they didn't write the studies cited. So, I want to ask: Does the White House have confidence that the information coming from HHS can be trusted?"

Leavitt answered that the administration had "complete confidence" in Kennedy and everyone at Health and Human Services.

"I understand there were some formatting issues with the MAHA report that are being addressed and the report will be updated, but it does not negate the substance of the report," Leavitt said.

EXCLUSIVE: Trump accused of new grift that puts Qatari plane in shade

The reporter then asked, "Is AI used to put together these reports?" to which Leavitt responded, "I can’t speak to that."

"So... did the authors of the MAHA report use AI, which hallucinated sources? Or did they simply make stuff up? Either way, it's incredibly embarrassing and people should resign," wrote physician @matthew_loftus.

Conservative commentator Erik Erickson wasn't buying Leavitt's explanation, posting to X, "Sounds very much like someone used ChatGPT or something to write the MAHA report for HHS."

Gaming influencer @AceDoloX1 wrote, "LOL this ONLY happens when AI is used. We're so cooked man.

The account of political commentator @NickAPappas wrote, "I can’t sympathize with people who spend all their time rejecting actual science and studies, undermining experts, and then decide to just trust the output of a faceless language model for their health advice. Their goal is to be a contrarian a------. They aren’t actually skeptical and careful, they want to appear like they are and continue to tear things down because it gives them joy."

'Oh my God!' CNN expert Harry Enten's jaw drops at AI revelation

CNN's chief data analyst Harry Enten expressed his shock at how difficult it's becoming to tell the difference between reality and artificial intelligence during a segment Wednesday.

Anchor Boris Sanchez began, "Harry, obviously, we're still in the very early stages of A.I. I just want to make sure — are you A.I. right now? Were you generated by artificial intelligence?"

"You stole my line!" Enten exclaimed. "I was going to ask you, am I real? Oh, my God, I hope so! I hope you're real, too."

Enten then got to the numbers to show how Americans were feeling about the advancing technology.

"I got to say, Americans are kind of skeptical of it," Enten said, revealing that while 38% of American believe A.I. is a good thing, 44% "say it will do more harm than good. That's the plurality there," he declared.

EXCLUSIVE: Trump accused of new grift that puts Qatari plane in shade

Enten said there was a "huge divide by education and by income" when it comes to trusting A.I.

"Just 26% of those who make less than $50,000 think it will be good," Enten said. "Then...look at that at 200-K-plus: the vast majority of those Americans think A.I. will do more good than harm. But when you go down to the bottom of that income bracket, there is a lot of skepticism of A.I. I think there are a lot of folks who might be worried that A.I. might take their jobs."

Enten concluded, "There is one thing that pretty much all Americans can agree on, Boris, and it's not just that I am real; it is this: should the government regulate A.I. more? Look at this — 69% of Americans say, 'Yes.' That is true across every single demographic group, where a majority of Americans agree that the government should do more to regulate A.I., and then we can once again ensure that Harry Joseph Strasburg Enten is a real human being with real friends like Boris Sanchez."

Watch the clip below via CNN.

Trump officials cite security risks as they scramble to halt president's new deals: report

President Donald Trump spent much of his four-day trip to the Middle East securing business deals, like the $600 billion investment pledge by the Saudis that Trump is trying to push to $1 trillion.

Among the agreements, "The American chip giants Nvidia and AMD will now be allowed to sell advanced chips to Saudi, Emirati and Qatari customers as those countries seek to become powerhouses in artificial intelligence. One customer is an enormous new A.I. campus in Abu Dhabi whose ambitions rival Stargate, the OpenAI-led venture, in size," The New York Times reported.

The deal was brokered by Trump's top A.I advisers David Sacks and Sriram Krishbnan, according to the Times. The venture capitalists "worked closely with CEOs, including Nvidia's Jensen Huanbg and Sam Altman of OpenAI."

But Trump's wheeling and dealing in the artificial intelligence sector is giving pause to some back home, with both Republican and Democratic "security hawks" concerned that the technology "might find its way to China."

EXCLUSIVE: Breastfeeding mom of US citizen sues Kristi Noem after being grabbed by ICE

"Some Trump officials are already weighing how to pause the deals over concerns they risk breaching security red lines, including that the technology could fall into the wrong hands," The Times reported.

Security concerns aside, some on Wall Street see this week’s trip "as opening a potential windfall for the sector," The Times reported.

"It could lift revenues for Nvidia and AMD in the coming quarters and even provide a boost to Micron, another chip maker that supplies those companies," The article said.

During Trump's time in the Middle East he met with top officials in Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. One of his most notable actions was lifting sanctions on Syria and sending overtures to Iran, saying he wanted to "make a deal" toward normalizing relations.

Read The New York Times article here.