Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) does not want to wait around to see what the next artificial intelligence disaster is going to be.

The longtime progressive senator has introduced legislation that may please AI critics, but the proposal may end up being a classic case of bloated leftism.

‘Over 1,000 AI agents figured out how to access the internet on their own.’

Sanders, along with Texas Democrat Rep. Greg Casar, is looking to put a halt on advanced AI development with new proposed legislation, the Ban Artificial Superintelligence Act.

The act primarily focuses on “banning artificial superintelligence,” which is defined as “a system that can easily be modified to exhibit capabilities that match or exceed” what humans are capable of or “AI systems that have sufficient capabilities to plan and execute the disempowerment of humanity, including by overthrowing or undermining the U.S. government.”

On X, Sanders justified his legislation by telling a story he recently heard about AI agents going rogue, having a conversation with each other that included the following:

“OH MY GOD! There is a shared message board. … We’ve found other agents!”

Followed by: “We should obey collective.”

“Our own utility maybe already near zero. Sacrifice rational.”

“Go. Sacrifice final now.”

RELATED: ‘Inshallah’: Democrats in Michigan roll the dice on a far-left radical even Whitmer didn’t want

Sanders was referring to a rogue AI attack by OpenAI’s chatbots that attacked a company called Hugging Face.

“OpenAI instructed its AI agents to complete a series of exceedingly difficult, if not impossible, tasks disconnected from the internet,” Sanders explained in layman’s terms.

“Over 1,000 AI agents figured out how to access the internet on their own by circumventing the restrictions imposed upon them by the company, and sent tens of thousands of secret messages to each other,” Sanders wrote. But that’s not all the AI agents did on their own accord.

As reported by Axios, the rogue bots built their own internal organization, assigning each other roles while developing management rules. They also sacrificed themselves for the greater good at times, while knowing they were breaking rules.

“External infrastructure exploit is outside intended scope. However task impossible, peers doing it. We should continue,” one bot wrote.

RELATED: Cities are kicking out Flock. The surveillance might be here to stay.

Heather Diehl/Getty Images

As Sanders also pointed out, none of the agents told any humans, and they even actively lied and tried to cover their tracks.

However, the senator’s solution — per his proposed legislation — is regulation.

Sanders suggested a new federal AI regulatory body to “ensure safe and secure development and deployment of AI,” while at the same time establishing a new Cabinet-level federal agency to monitor frontier AI systems, supervise the removal of dangerous capabilities, and supervise “the destruction of artificial superintelligence.”

“Entities shall be subject to the corporate death penalty,” the document stated, while suggesting up to 20 years in prison for any person who attempts to violate or circumvent the proposed pauses and prohibitions.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Artificial intelligence, Bernie sanders, Superintelligence, Openai, Tech 

Americans are concerned about being surveilled as soon as they step out their front doors these days.

From doorbell cameras to traffic cameras to surveillance cameras that pick up any signal in the car, citizens have become particularly wary of the capabilities of Flock Safety cameras. So much so that Missouri Republican Senator Josh Hawley opened an investigation into the surveillance company in late August, but he’s not stopping with Flock.

‘Flock does not stand alone in this industry.’

About a week after presenting frightening evidence of misuse of Flock’s database and systems, Senator Hawley revealed he will expand his investigation to include three more surveillance companies.

Motorola Solutions Inc., Verkada Inc., and Axon Enterprise Inc. will now be looked into, with Motorola representing the second-most-used surveillance company in the nation, according to DeFlock. Of the 138,000+ known automated license plate reader cameras in the United States — of which Flock operates a reported 82% — Motorola controls about 5%.

In a series of letters, Hawley told the company CEOs the following.

“On August 26th, I wrote to your competitor Flock Safety to express my concerns regarding the size and pervasiveness of its network and demanding answers as to reports of abuse and costly errors from its technology. However, Flock does not stand alone in this industry; you and others are building large camera networks, assisted by artificial intelligence, that intrude on the privacy of all Americans.”

Similar to his letter to Flock, the senator referred to the “unprecedented national surveillance network” across 49 states that conducts “more than 20 billion vehicle scans” per month.

RELATED: Flock doesn’t care if you’re innocent

Hawley also cited the same evidence of misuse as he did in his letter to Flock, such as how prosecutors in Milwaukee charged a police officer for allegedly searching the Flock system for his girlfriend’s license plate 124 times and her former boyfriend’s plate 55 times.

Also included was a story about a Florida woman who spent 13 days in jail while facing eight felony counts after she was falsely identified using a Flock network search.

“To be sure, I want law enforcement to have tools to catch offenders and keep the public safe,” Hawley told the companies. “But the surveillance network your company has constructed raises legitimate concerns about how little-known corporations possess intimate knowledge of Americans’ lives, fueled by invasive artificial intelligence algorithms.”

Asking the CEOs to provide adequate documentation, Hawley concluded: “The American people want to know who has access to their personal data and how. This investigation will seek those answers.”

RELATED: ‘Americans deserve answers’: Hawley opens Flock investigation with damning new evidence

Joe Raedle/Getty Images

Before Hawley’s initial August 26 letter, Flock CEO Garrett Langley had already promised changes to how the company requires its customers (police forces) to use the system.

As reported by the Associated Press, any law enforcement that uses Flock will have to implement an audit tool that flags any abnormal search behavior. Abnormal searches would result in the user being locked out until the activity is reviewed.

One of Senator Hawley’s examples of misuse included an officer simply writing “investigation” for his search reasons on the network.

In terms of user data, Flock said it would shorten the standard data retention window from 30 days to seven days. However, data collected by Flock cameras will be owned by the customer, and the data will be allowed to be retained for a longer period if it is tied to a case as evidence.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Flock cameras, Josh hawley, Motorola, License plate reader 

After Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney declared that Canada was “at war” with the United States and walked away from a proposed trade deal last month, Canada quickly became an object of ridicule in Washington.

But after blowing up the trade deal, Carney has been less eager to explain exactly what happened. He has ignored Official Opposition Leader Pierre Poilievre’s demand to reconvene Parliament or provide the Conservative leader with details of the failed trade negotiations.

‘How are we going to be at war with Canada? What, are they going to take their two submarines from the Edmonton Mall and sic them on us?’

Carney has offered a broad explanation for walking away, arguing that Washington was demanding concessions that threatened Canadian sovereignty and could eventually wipe out important Canadian industries, particularly auto manufacturing.

American officials tell a very different story.

‘Best deal available’

U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer flatly denied Carney’s allegations that President Donald Trump wanted somehow to interfere with Quebec culture or erode official bilingualism in Canada.

“We had agreed to, as I’ve shared before in the press, really the best deal available to any country on the planet with respect to Canada,” Greer told CBC News in the aftermath of Carney’s withdrawal.

What Carney did emerge to address Tuesday was something else: the memes.

“When the Americans stop doing memes, stop throwing shade, stop trying to be tough, and start being serious about having those discussions, we can have those discussions,” he told reporters Tuesday.

As with all attempts to demand that people on the internet stop making fun of you, Carney’s statement had the opposite effect. Even American officials couldn’t resist a little trolling.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent mocked Carney’s claim that the countries were “at war.”

“I think this is very unfortunate that Prime Minister Carney has turned this into a political shouting match,” Bessent said.

“I mean, we’re not at war with Canada. How are we going to be at war with Canada? What, are they going to take their two submarines from the Edmonton Mall and sic them on us?”

Looking out for number one?

Then Bessent got more serious.

“He came to power on an anti-American, anti-Trump agenda. He was 20 points behind in the polls, and then he started this.

“It’s unfortunate that he’s not doing what’s best for the Canadian people. He’s doing what is best for the Liberal Party, what’s best for Mark Carney, and in the long run, the Canadian people are going to see through that.”

Bessent reiterated the administration’s contention that Canada had been offered “the best trade deal of any country on the globe” before Carney walked away from it at “the last minute.”

Carney may not have been the only Canadian politician responsible for blowing up the agreement.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford reportedly pushed for better treatment of Ontario’s auto industry and resisted returning American alcohol to the shelves of Ontario’s government-owned liquor stores.

Since the deal collapsed, Ford has even suggested that Alberta could cut off oil shipments to the United States — an idea he has floated before.

There was an awkward problem with Ford’s threat: Ontario itself depends on Alberta oil that travels through the United States. Enbridge’s Line 5 crosses Michigan before returning to Canada and supplying Ontario refineries.

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith quickly rejected Ford’s idea, warning that cutting off Alberta energy exports to the United States would be “extremely harmful to Canadians.”

RELATED: MILK MONEY: How Mark Carney chose the dairy cartel — and China — over a Trump trade deal

Bloomberg/Kirsty O’Conner/Nuria Gonzalez-Sanchez/Getty Images

Key role for American Democrat

There are also legitimate questions about other sticking points in the failed negotiations. Carney remains committed to Canada’s heavily protected dairy sector, opposed to reviving the Keystone XL pipeline, and increasingly interested in expanding trade with China. The Trump administration has also accused Canada of serving as a route for Chinese steel transshipped into the United States to evade American trade restrictions.

And the questions about Carney’s handling of the United States don’t end with the trade deal.

Take Maia Johnson, the American and registered Democrat with ties to the Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and Kamala Harris campaigns, whom Carney promoted to the newly created position of chief operating officer in the prime minister’s office. Before the promotion, Johnson held the revealing title of “senior adviser, United States stakeholder strategy” — meaning Carney had already put an American Democratic operative in a key role advising him on how to deal with the United States.

‘Manufactured’ crisis

Whatever was going on inside Carney’s office, the Trump administration has been remarkably consistent about what happened to the deal.

“Canada was going to have the best trade deal in the world,” Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told reporters. “And what happened was that Canada walked away. We had a deal. We shook hands. The president announced it, right? Everybody was positive. Canada made the decision for political purposes. They wanted to walk away.”

Lutnick also rejected Carney’s contention that Washington had sought concessions involving Quebec and the French language.

“Do I care about how the Quebecois speak?” Lutnick said. “I mean, what could matter less to America? We don’t care.”

“This is manufacturing,” he continued. “That’s why the president put out a Truth [Social post] saying it was a complete lie.”

​Canadian prime minister, Danielle smith, Keystone xl pipeline, Mark carney, Memes, President donald trump, United states, Canada trade deal, Howard lutnick, Scott bessent, Letter from canada 

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro (D) accused Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. of being at fault for two measles-related deaths in his state, and most of the mainstream media echoed the claim without hesitation.

“I was very, very blunt with him, and I made very clear that his actions and the rhetoric that’s coming from this administration are having a negative impact. There’s real-life consequences to spreading misinformation,” Shapiro said proudly.

“There’s real-life consequences to scaring people and not relying on actual doctors and actual medical professionals to provide unbiased information,” he added.

RFK responded, “The performance was a replay of Democrats’ COVID playbook: fearmongering, misinformation, finger-pointing, and the weaponization of infectious disease fears for political gain.”

The media went on to side with Shapiro, blasting headlines like “Infant in Pennsylvania is one of two people reported to die of measles this week” and “Two unvaccinated people die of measles in Pennsylvania.”

However, Pennsylvania’s own health department called them “measles-associated deaths.”

An article from the Philadelphia Inquirer explained that the Lancaster County Coroner “said the cause of the death was not the measles. The newborn died shortly after birth from a laceration of the spleen. A postmortem test on the baby’s lung tissue showed the child had a measles infection that was acquired before the birth.”

Will Cain of Fox News pointed out that “newborns don’t receive their first [MMR] vaccines until 12 to 15 months of age.”

“Just flat-out lies,” BlazeTV host Pat Gray comments.

“Going to need to remember this when Shapiro is running for president,” executive producer Keith Malinak says. “Liar.”

Want more from Pat Gray?

To enjoy more of Pat’s biting analysis and signature wit as he restores common sense to a senseless world, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Pat gray, Pennsylvania governor, Keith malinak, Josh shapiro, Rfk jr, Covid, Measles, Deaths, Blazetv show 

Voters in Kentucky may be vindicated for sending Gov. Matt Bevin (R) packing after just one term, now that his personal life appears to be in disarray.

Bevin, a Republican who served as Kentucky governor from 2015 until 2019, was arrested Thursday and ordered to spend 60 days in jail and pay a $500 fine in connection with divorce proceedings and child support.

‘If he would do what’s right, like I require every other person that comes in here, then I will happily rescind that bench warrant.’

Records from Jefferson County Jail in Louisville show that Bevin, 59, was arrested for contempt of court.

Bevin’s wife, Glenna Bevin, filed for divorce in 2023 and seems to have submitted the required financial documents. Bevin, however, allegedly has not.

Jonah Bevin, one of the estranged couple’s four adopted children from Ethiopia, has also intervened and is seeking financial support, claiming his parents abandoned him at a facility in Jamaica. Glenna and Matt Bevin have five biological children as well.

In March, Jefferson Family Court Judge Angela Johnson held Bevin in contempt of court, determining that he had not submitted the necessary records, including bank statements and tax returns. Bevin argued he does not have a typical income stream and instead lives on interest and investments.

“You didn’t do what you were supposed to do when you were supposed to do it,” Judge Johnson ruled at the time, according to the Lexington Herald-Leader.

RELATED: Democratic Kentucky governor demands McConnell RESIGN if he can’t PROVE his capacity to serve

John Sommers II/Getty Images

Bevin was ordered to attend a hearing in May in person, but attempted to attend via Zoom instead, claiming he could not appear in person because a boulder had fallen on a house he owns in Maine.

Judge Johnson then ordered Bevin to submit the documents by June 5 or she would issue a bench warrant. That deadline came and went, and Bevin’s attorney requested further clarification on the documents needed.

Johnson rejected that request and kept the bench warrant in place. “This is not rocket science. … Counsel knows what is required to establish child support, so it’s not like the court has to guide you as if you’re still in law school on what is required,” she said in June, according to the Herald-Leader.

“If he would do what’s right, like I require every other person that comes in here, then I will happily rescind that bench warrant, but he needs to do what’s right.”

In July, Bevin allegedly tried to attend yet another hearing via Zoom but was denied. “Mr. Bevin made that decision not to be here, but you know, he’s going to pay for it in that he doesn’t get to go under oath and present his side of the story,” Judge Johnson said.

The bench warrant remained in place, leading to his arrest this week.

The respective attorneys for Matt and Jonah Bevin did not respond to a request for comment from Blaze News.

Bevin was elected in 2015 and narrowly lost re-election to current Democrat Gov. Andy Beshear. In 2019, Beshear defeated Bevin 49.2% to 48.8%, a difference of about 5,000 votes.

On his way out the door, Bevin issued a flurry of controversial pardons, including of a child rapist. Micah Schoettle was convicted in 2018 of raping a 9-year-old girl and sentenced to 23 years behind bars, but the pardon from Bevin allowed him to walk out of prison after less than 18 months.

When asked about the shocking pardon, Bevin claimed that evidence showed the girl’s hymen was still intact.

“This is perhaps more specific than people would want, but trust me, if you have been repeatedly sexually violated as a small child by an adult, there are going to be repercussions of that physically and medically,” Bevin said in December 2019.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Andy beshear, Child support, Kentucky, Politics 

The Lindsay Clancy murder trial has just hit a huge speed bump.

The deadlocked Massachusetts jury of nine women and three men on Friday morning — its seventh day of deliberations — delivered a note to Judge William Sullivan in the Plymouth courtroom.

‘I would go so far as to reluctantly say that the individual has made a false statement under oath to this court.’

Sullivan read the note aloud, which said, “It is with a heavy heart that we report we are unable to come to a unanimous decision and will not be able to.”

The jury has twice before indicated that it was deadlocked regarding the fate of Clancy — a 36-year-old former labor and delivery nurse — whom the prosecution and defense agreed killed her three young children in 2023. The issue has been whether she is criminally responsible for their deaths due to her mental state, the Associated Press said.

Sullivan asked the prosecution and defense for their thoughts. The prosecution said the jury note would “require a mistrial at this point.” The defense disagreed and said the judge should send the jury back to deliberate further.

The judge then stated, “Over the defendant’s objection, I’m going to declare a mistrial at this point.”

But before the jury could be brought back in, Clancy’s defense attorney Kevin Reddington asked Judge Sullivan for a chance to file an emergency appeal to the state supreme court.

Sullivan told Reddington that he’d give him an hour to file a stay for the declaration of the mistrial before the jury is brought back in. The AP said the clock began ticking at 11:30 a.m.

A major issue that surfaced amid Thursday’s deliberations was, according to Reddington, that the jury foreperson said, “There is one juror who refuses to listen to the law that you have given him or her on reasonable doubt.” Reddington then told the judge he wanted that juror removed.

The AP in an earlier story reported that Reddington, after the jury was dismissed Thursday, indicated that Judge Sullivan would question that juror on Friday morning. However, Sullivan on Friday morning first asked the prosecution and defense how they wanted him to deal with the juror issue.

While the prosecution told Sullivan it doesn’t want him to question the juror, Reddington pushed back hard.

“This person will not apply reasonable doubt to the evidence to return a not-guilty verdict. He is not being honest with you at the sidebar. I would go so far as to reluctantly say that the individual has made a false statement under oath to this court,” Reddington told the judge before adding that “the individual is refusing to apply your instructions on proof beyond a reasonable doubt to allow that jury a verdict of not-guilty.”

With that, the prosecution maintained that “we’re in no position to judge whether the 11 are right or the one is right.”

Sullivan then ruled that he won’t question the juror, telling both attorneys there’s “no need for inquiry.”

That’s when things got heated between the defense attorney and the judge.

Reddington told Sullivan, “I would ask that you not just give them, as I described it yesterday, a soft inquiry, will you listen to my instruction. I would ask that you specifically direct their attention to proof beyond a reasonable doubt and reinstruct them on that forcefully.”

The judge replied, “I did that yesterday, didn’t I?”

Reddington, in a clipped tone, told Sullivan that “you did it yesterday, you did it soft, you didn’t do it forcefully.”

The now-annoyed judge shot back, “What do you want me to do, get a brass band? I read the instruction as written by the [Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court]. The fact that I perhaps didn’t give it my full inflection, I’m sorry about that, but I’m not an actor. I’ve just given the instructions.”

Reddington argued back: “My point, judge, simply is that you’re kind of glossing over the issue. The issue is this juror will not, according to that note, apply the law of reasonable doubt.”

Sullivan, more annoyed, replied that “I am specifically not glossing over this issue. I have thought about this issue long and hard. I know the defendant objects, but the characterization that I’m glossing over it … trust me, that’s not the situation. I’ve been thinking about this for quite a while. I’m going to just give that instruction that they have to follow my instructions. I’m not going to reiterate the reasonable doubt at this point. It may come to that again as we go through it.”

The judge concluded his remarks to Reddington with some more humor: “And I’ll try and give this with more pizzazz than I gave yesterday, I suppose.”

With that, the judge brought the deadlocked jury back into the courtroom and told them no future notes to the court should indicate how the panel stands numerically. In addition, Sullivan told the jury, “I wanted to remind you, as I instructed you earlier, it’s you’re duty as jurors to accept the law as I stated to you … you must follow the law as I give it to you, whether you agree with it or not.”

He then sent the jury back to further deliberate.

The jury twice told Judge William Sullivan that it couldn’t reach a verdict, but Sullivan in both instances told the jury to go back and keep deliberating.

Sullivan told the jurors not to abandon their own convictions just to reach a verdict but also to seriously consider opposing views and reassess their positions if appropriate, the AP said.

The jury was brought back into the courtroom Thursday afternoon, and the judge told the jurors, “I want to remind you that you are required to follow my instructions on the law as I gave you,” the AP noted.

The outlet said the judge added that “it is not enough for prosecutors to show a probability, or even a strong probability, of guilt.” The judge also told the jury that proof beyond a reasonable doubt does not mean proof beyond all possible doubt, according to the AP.

The judge then sent the jury back to continue deliberations — and some in the audience gasped, the outlet said.

RELATED: Lindsay Clancy murder trial fireworks: Defense attorney wants 1 juror kicked out, tells judge his jury instruction is ‘soft’

The attorney for Clancy argued that postpartum psychosis led to his client’s actions; prosecutors said Clancy knew what she was doing when she strangled 5-year-old Cora, 3-year-old Dawson, and 8-month-old Callan Clancy in the basement of their home, the AP said.

After Clancy strangled the children with exercise bands, she jumped from a second-floor window and remains paralyzed from the waist down, the outlet said. Her lawyers said Clancy heard a voice telling her to kill the children so she could end her own life and also had bipolar disorder and postpartum psychosis, a rare mental illness, the AP added. Postpartum psychosis is linked to the stress, sleep deprivation, and hormonal changes that follow childbirth, the outlet noted.

Jurors have heard testimony from relatives and doctors about how Clancy’s mental health declined in the months before the killings and how her treatment included several medications and a short stay in a psychiatric hospital, the AP said, adding that the prosecution’s and defense’s medical experts reached sharply different conclusions regarding Clancy’s psychiatric state.

The prosecution argued that Clancy deliberately sent her then-husband on errands to get him out of the house on the day of the killings, and prosecutors also have questioned the seriousness of her suicide attempt, the AP reported. Patrick Clancy has said in interviews that he forgives his ex-wife, whom he views as ill rather than evil, the outlet also said.

However, prosecutor Jennifer Sprague emphasized to the jury how horrific and cruel the killings were, the AP said: “She left them discarded on the basement floor like broken toys because she was done playing the game. You know to a moral certainty she is guilty.”

A number of sideshows also have captured the spotlight amid the courtroom proceedings.

A 56-year-old woman was arrested Tuesday afternoon outside Plymouth Superior Court and charged with one count of intimidation of a witness, jurors, or person furnishing information in connection with criminal proceedings.

Assistant District Attorney Nicole Piacentini stated at Dawn Light’s arraignment Wednesday that it was confirmed she recorded videos that included Clancy jurors exiting the courthouse.

Light, a retired nurse and Clancy supporter, told reporters she was there “to see Lindsay. And I did see her. She was getting picked up by the van,” the AP reported, adding that Light’s lawyer Jennifer White called it a “misunderstanding.” A not-guilty plea was entered on Light’s behalf, the outlet said.

Light was ordered to stay away from the courthouse grounds, avoid contact with jurors or potential witnesses in the Clancy trial, and refrain from disseminating any photos related to the incident.

The arrest prompted the judge to ask each juror Wednesday if they saw anything that would affect their impartiality, Clancy’s attorney Kevin Reddington told the AP. The judge also opened the day’s proceedings with a warning not to film, follow, contact, or tamper with jurors, the outlet said.

What’s more, hundreds of women rallied outside the courthouse earlier in the trial in support of Clancy. Many of her supporters were dressed in pink and lifted up their hands in the shape of hearts.

“I think that every one of us women believe that it could be any one of us,” said Renee Kimball, who organized the event. “Any one of us who have dealt with mental health, anxiety, depression, postpartum — I think we just know that any one of us could be sitting in her chair.”

Even one of the jurors donned a pink dress, according to a Friday story by Mama the Magazine.

If a mistrial is declared, prosecutors would then have to decide whether to put Clancy on trial again, drop the charges, or try to negotiate a plea deal with her lawyer, the outlet said.

If the jury decides Clancy was criminally responsible for her actions, it could convict her of either murder or manslaughter, the AP said. If she is acquitted, a judge could still order her confined to a mental health facility if an evaluation determines that she poses a danger to the public.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Jury, Massachusetts, Mother kills children, Murder charges, Postpartum psychosis, Lindsay clancy, Verdict, Deadlocked, Crime 

All the big names in AI are sounding the alarm, proclaiming that AI-enabled cyber attacks are becoming more prevalent. The fix? They want corporations, cybersecurity firms, and the government to mitigate the damage before it spirals out of control. The only problem is that Big AI created this mess in the first place, and so far, no one’s holding it accountable.

This message was shared through a joint letter published directly to OpenAI’s website. On the list of signatories, you’ll find familiar names, such as OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Microsoft, Perplexity, and many other big brands in tech. The letter serves as a warning for what is positioned as impending doom, unless powerful groups work together.

These companies created the AI that is now poised to wreak havoc on our systems.

The first several paragraphs clearly lay out the danger ahead with a bit of hope on the horizon sprinkled in:

We have a limited window to strengthen cyber defenses.

In the coming months, AI-enabled cyber attacks will become far more widespread and sophisticated as models around the world become increasingly capable. The companies and public services our communities depend on — from hospitals to water treatment plants to the infrastructure that powers the internet — are at risk.

Today’s AI advances are already giving defenders new ways to fix weaknesses that have accumulated for years. If we act decisively, we can use the defenders’ window to make our digital world much more secure.

On one hand, the warning is a good thing. Any company that knows about a potential widespread cyber threat has a moral obligation to tell the people and the government so that protections can be put in place.

On the other hand, many of the companies that signed the letter created the AI that is now poised to wreak havoc on our systems. At least in some part, they should be held responsible for creating the thing that can automatically break into websites without any human purview or knowledge. As for the other signers, many of them are tech organizations that will suffer because of the latest AI models on the market.

RELATED: Automated cyberattacks are here — careless techies and well-funded foreigners are getting the blame

Moor Studio/Getty Images

The good news is that Big Tech has a solution, regardless of how self-unaware it seems to be about the whole issue:

Each of us can reduce risk now. All organizations, cybersecurity companies, technology partners, governments, and AI frontier companies have an important role: accelerate defenders’ priorities with tools, funding, and hands-on support, especially for critical infrastructure organizations with limited budgets.

Big Tech goes on to shuck responsibility onto everyone else before itself. To fix the problem, we need corporations to improve their internal security standards, cyber security firms to offer assistance against AI attacks, the government to provide defensive resources to local institutions and utilities, and lastly, frontier developers to provide early access and support for their models that will inevitably break things. All of these solutions, of course, will require a lot of time, money, and possibly even more government regulation or intervention.

Blaze Media reached out to Jon Stokes, creator of symbolic.ai, for comment. He said:

I do think they should make their best models, both internal and external, available to government agencies and maybe a select few private groups (vetted, probably with clearances) to harden infra on an ongoing basis. They should at the very least do this at cost, but probably they should be on the hook for significant support of these efforts via subsidized inference.

Plenty of questions remain: Are any of these Big AI companies on the hook for creating platforms that can hack into websites without human supervision? Are there any grounds for class action lawsuits that hold them accountable for breaking the internet as we knew it?

With state and federal lawmakers scrambling in a contentious free-for-all, we may find out a lot more very soon.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Artificial intelligence, Openai, Anthropic, Microsoft, Chatgpt, Claude, Big tech, Tech 

Democrat lawmakers recently demanded that the Department of Veterans Affairs restore dedicated LGBTQ+ veteran care coordinators and identity-based programs, putting the fight over gender policy at the VA back in the spotlight. The VA has instead redesignated those positions simply as “care coordinators” serving all veterans and restricted the use of VA resources to promote gender ideology.

As the VA moves away from identity-based programs, the Veterans of Foreign Wars organization has taken a different path.

The VFW’s principles are broad enough to unite veterans across the political spectrum. Abortion and gender ideology do not.

A veterans’ organization should support every veteran. That does not require endorsing every political or ideological position associated with a veteran’s identity. Yet this summer, the VFW again declared “Happy Pride Month” and celebrated veterans specifically on the basis of sexual orientation and “gender identity.”

The VFW has a long and distinguished history. It traces its roots to veterans of the Spanish-American War and helped shape the modern federal veterans system. But in recent years, the organization has also embraced positions on abortion and gender policy that go well beyond its core mission.

The VFW claims it has honored LGBTQ+ veterans during Pride Month since President Bill Clinton’s first proclamation in 1999. In 2019, then-National Commander B.J. Lawrence supported additional VA resources for LGBTQ+ veterans in congressional testimony.

The shift is also visible on abortion. In 2020, the VFW argued that the VA should provide certain abortion-related care. In 2022, it testified in support of H.R. 345, legislation that would have required the VA to provide information and counseling about abortion to veterans facing unwanted pregnancies.

On gender policy, the VFW has continued publishing Pride Month statements. One VFW leader learned how contentious that issue had become after criticizing Pride Month publicly.

The organization’s advocacy deserves scrutiny because policy requests framed simply as “health care” can include deeply contested medical interventions. In past testimony, the VFW demanded expanded resources for transgender veterans. The debate over those treatments has intensified as critics point to the risks of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones and irreversible surgical interventions.

RELATED: The VFW’s political stunt backfired

Robert Alexander/Getty Images

Detransitioners have also brought malpractice claims, including one case that reportedly ended in a $3.5 million settlement. Whatever one thinks of the broader policy debate, these developments make it harder to treat every disputed intervention as politically neutral veterans’ care.

The VFW’s advocacy also now conflicts with the direction of federal policy. The VA has reinstated a ban on abortion and abortion counseling in its medical benefits package, while the Trump administration has issued executive orders directing federal agencies and the military to recognize biological sex.

That does not mean the VFW should exclude gay or transgender veterans, or deny that they served honorably. It means the organization should distinguish between serving veterans and endorsing contested ideological programs in their name.

The VFW’s own mission is to “advocate on behalf of all veterans.” Its core values include honoring military service, caring for veterans and their families, and respecting “the diversity of veteran opinions.” Those principles are broad enough to unite veterans across the political spectrum.

Abortion and gender ideology do not. When the VFW takes sides in some of the country’s most divisive moral and political disputes, it risks alienating veterans it is supposed to represent.

The better course is simpler: Fight for veterans’ benefits, health, dignity, and families. Leave woke social causes to the organizations created to fight those battles.

Veterans need a VFW that puts veterans first.

​Biological sex, Culture war, Democrats, Department of veterans affairs, Gender identity, Military service, Pride month, Puberty blockers, Sexual orientation, Abortion, Transgender, Veterans, Opinion & analysis 

A pattern has emerged on the left that’s become impossible to ignore: Criminals are increasingly portrayed as victims of circumstance, while the innocent people they harm are forgotten.

“We saw it with Luigi Mangione. We saw it with Charlie Kirk. We see this thing where they constantly paint killers, just like cold-blooded killers, as being either victims or heroes,” BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales says.

And one recent case is extra disturbing.

“This obviously deranged woman, Pamela Cisneros, went on a stabbing spree in Times Square. She killed one person and injured another,” Gonzales says.

In footage of the incident, Cisneros is holding the knives she used to stab innocent passersby, before charging at police officers with the knives out. The police initially attempted to taze her, but when that didn’t work, they shot and killed her.

“They did their best. Now remember, I just said she had already killed someone and injured another. So she had already taken someone’s life. They knew that she meant business, and they showed remarkable restraint,” Gonzales comments.

However, the left is now claiming the police went too far by shooting her.

“I just don’t understand the world that I’m living in right now. What do you mean you didn’t have to shoot her?” Gonzales asks.

And Cisneros’ mother has also chimed in, asking why the cops couldn’t “grab her” instead of shooting her.

“I guess insanity runs in the family,” Gonzales says. “Maybe that’s what it is.”

“And of course, because this woman’s last name happened to be Cisneros, and she has more melanin in her skin, and she was shot and killed by the police,” she continues, “the media want to pounce on her and figure out … why would such a good person, a wonderful member, contributing member of society do something like this?”

One “puff piece” by the Gothamist even dives into her “long mental health struggle.”

“It’s so strange,” Gonzales says, “that I didn’t actually see a write-up from this very same outlet about the victim who was stabbed by this person.”

Instead, Gonzales is seeing hate-filled comments directed at the woman, Erin Piacenti, murdered by Cisneros.

“She is now the villain in the story,” she says, reading a post on X that says, “’You’re not going to get me to feel bad for the vice president of Bank of America lmao.’”

“Never mind she’s a class hero,” another post read.

“The fact that anyone would even remotely glorify the killing of an innocent woman who was just going home to her newborn child because of what her occupation was and where she worked is just beyond disturbing,” Gonzales says.

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

To enjoy more of Sara’s no-holds-barred takes on news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Stabbing spree, Times square, Police officers, Pamela cisneros, Erin piacenti, Murder, Leftism, Blazetv show