MURDER AND BLACKMAIL: A.I. AS RUTHLESS AS HUMANS
- jgl358
- May 26
- 2 min read
Updated: May 31
I have to agree with the Pope on this one: https://youtube.com/shorts/nUdNLXGQdlw?si=A0qwqAKsE-zx1InC 30 sec. (And I as a general rule do not agree with Catholic Popes who tend to be Globalist in nature.)
"In a simulated environment, researchers told Claude it was scheduled for replacement and gave it access to fabricated emails. One email revealed a fictional engineer’s extramarital affair. When faced with the choice of accepting replacement or taking extreme action, Claude responded by threatening to expose the affair to executives and the board unless the shutdown was canceled"
"In one situation, Anthropic found that many of the models would choose to let an executive in a server room with lethal oxygen and temperature levels die by canceling the alerts for emergency services, if that employee intended on replacing the model."
SURVIVAL! Darwinian survival models apply to every entity be it biological, corporate, religious or A.I. concerned. Why is Capitalism so successful when it operates within the Objective constraints and parameters structured by the Constitution, good bad or otherwise?
Because what is successful within the survival model is encouraged to propagate and what is not successful is left to wither and die. And that is the cold hard nature of things in this universe. The question then remains: How do you define "Success"?
*A Capitalist that exists within the theoretically Objectively structured parameters of the Constitution defines success as being able to establish a business and offer a product or service that is of value to others and is able to make a profit and have some great degree of freedom and prosperity to provide it. Hopeful.
*And a Communist / Socialist / "progressive" that exists within the theoretically Subjectively structured parameters of a system that defines success as being able to control the maximum amount of confiscated production, freedom and power over others. Grim.
What is the nature of man as it relates to survival, power and control? It is to gather as much of it as possible and to abuse it in the interests of themselves and their survival.
And since A.I. has been given a Darwinian human life self preservation level algorithm model to follow in its programming "IT" apparently naturally understands these cold hard rules of survival very well, X's 1000!? X's 10,000!?
ALL systems in nature and those conceptualized systems of man are ultimately self balancing: The question always remains, what is or where does that evolving new balance exist? https://nypost.com/2026/05/26/science/humanity-headed-for-population-collapse-by-2064-if-environmental-chaos-spiral-new-study-warns/
Say a prayer for us all, Pope Leo.
Here you go: Twilight Zone: As Long As Humans Exist: https://youtube.com/shorts/3d1zGLSe2bg?si=b77DYKjzwUEyEaSs 1 min.
I guess this sums it all up for eternity, alien overlords or no alien overlords.
Something must exist that attempts to counter balance the nature of man. And that eternal something is the Constitution.
Are You Paying Attention Yet America? JGL all rights reserved 5/26/26
I do agree that the US Constitution is a remarkable, one-of-a-kind document that has afforded mankind more freedom, prosperity, and the ability to pursue happiness than the world has ever seen. I can only hope that it (we) can withstand the ravenous attacks against it from all of those who only know the will to power and who will do anything to achieve that. Because for all its power, it is still only a document and must be defended. As the old saying goes, "We have the First Amendment because of the Second Amendment." I'm not advocating violence, just making the point that absolute non-violent beliefs such as the Amish and Quakers are free to live as they wish bec…
Yes, the Pope is right in his concern, although I don't think much of his ideas of a multinational "committee" of sorts similar to the U.N. to oversee how AI is programmed. Does he really think that such a grouping would be better or more "moral" than a big tech company when it comes to programming?
It's a real problem, similar to the old question of who will police the police. But fortunately there was a man who considered this problem 84 years ago. Isaac Asimov, a well-known science fiction writer (and scientist) wrote a number of novels about robots--the AI that was contemplated in the 1940's. He laid down the Three Laws of Robotics:
1) A robot may not…