{"id":329941,"date":"2026-08-13T05:56:34","date_gmt":"2026-08-13T05:56:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/?p=329941"},"modified":"2026-08-15T05:47:57","modified_gmt":"2026-08-15T05:47:57","slug":"kit-knightly-the-rogue-ai-psy-op-part-3-do-you-see-where-this-is-going-yet","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/?p=329941","title":{"rendered":"Kit Knightly: The Rogue AI Psy-Op Part 3 \u2013 do you see where this is going yet?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Kit Knightly \u2013 Off-Guardian Aug 11, 2026<\/strong><\/h1>\n

A few days ago,\u00a0I wrote an article<\/a>\u00a0highlighting the bizarre story of OpenAI AND Anthropic AND Meta all suddenly claiming to have \u201crogue AI agents\u201d escape their \u201ccontainment\u201d and try to hack other companies in the space of a week or two.<\/p>\n

Two days after that I penned\u00a0the sequel<\/a>, noting the even more extreme \u201cscary AI\u201d stories \u2013 from mind-reading computers to bio-engineered viruses \u2013 that were manifesting all over the media landscape, and the massive surge in \u201cregulate AI\u201d hot takes.<\/p>\n

Consider this the final part of the \u201cRogue AI\u201d trilogy.<\/p>\n

If you\u2019re not seeing the pattern yet there\u2019s not much more I can do, and I\u2019m running out of ways to say the same thing in slightly different words.<\/p>\n

Anyway\u2026what\u2019s new to the AI propaganda storm since the last time we chatted?<\/p>\n

New Orleans is going to start\u00a0using AI for 911 calls<\/a>. That sounds a little shady, doesn\u2019t it?<\/p>\n

OpenAI\u2019s\u00a0chief ethical consultant has resigned<\/a>, that\u2019s a sure sign they\u2019re doing evil stuff. Your ethics officer doesn\u2019t resign unless something bad is going down <\/sarc>.<\/p>\n

The latest \u201cdisclosure\u201d (read \u201cmade up nonsense\u201d)\u00a0 from the AI sector is that multiple rogue agents (allegedly)\u00a0\u201ccolluded\u201d on secret message boards<\/a>\u00a0to figure out the best ways to cheat the tests they were given.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s possible\u00a0a small Israeli company<\/a>\u00a0might to be blame for all of this, just to make sure there\u2019s something for everyone on the scary AI propaganda buffet.<\/p>\n

Boy George supposedly\u00a0used AI to write his new pro-Israel song<\/a>, so how\u2019s that for your double whammy.<\/p>\n

On the sillier side of \u201cscary AI\u201d news, did you hear about the AI agent that\u00a0hacked a gym\u2019s membership<\/a>\u00a0to get its owner an appointment? Or that google AI leaked\u00a0\u201cscarily accurate\u201d data\u00a0<\/a>about an indie game that hadn\u2019t been released yet? Or that people are doing job interviews with AI agents\u00a0in the middle of the night<\/a>?<\/p>\n

Stories like this are a sign we\u2019ve entered what you could call the \u201cpropaganda free for all\u201d stage. Those moments when ANY story, no matter how inane or insane, is given air time just because it might end up serving\u00a0 the greater goal (see:\u00a0Covid sniffer dogs<\/a>, for example).<\/p>\n

But these are a symptom, not a disease. Little propaganda pilot fish swimming around a shark.<\/p>\n

\u2026and speaking of unsettling predators with cold, dead eyes, Mark Zuckerberg (allegedly) authored a 6500 word manifesto for his vision of AI\u2019s future titled\u00a0\u201cThe Future is for Everyone\u201d<\/a>.<\/p>\n

According to Zuck, AI \u2013 which he refers to as \u201csuperintelligence\u201d throughout \u2013 will launch a golden age of civilisation\u2026if handled properly. It is a utopian counterargument, which actually serves as narrative reinforcement for the fear-psy-op.<\/p>\n

His repeated calls to address the \u201crisks\u201d of this new technology only serve to underline that there ARE risks, that people should be afraid, and that\u00a0 hmmm\u2026maybe the state should do something to mitigate them.<\/em><\/p>\n

In a rather less verbose, but strategically similar move, OpenAI has\u00a0delayed its planned release<\/a>\u00a0of its next AI model.<\/p>\n

This is a sign we have firmly transitioned from the problem to the reaction.<\/p>\n

The Wall Street Journal<\/em>\u00a0is branding this\u00a0\u201cthe summer of rogue AI\u201d<\/a>\u00a0and reporting:<\/p>\n

A string of AI models escaping testing environments is testing how seriously enterprises take governance<\/em><\/p>\n

The New Yorker<\/a><\/em>\u00a0is noting that being anti-AI is now a\u00a0\u201cmajor electoral issue\u201d<\/em>\u00a0that provides a rare\u00a0\u201ccross-party consensus\u201d<\/em>.<\/p>\n

\u201cExperts\u201d on Channel 4\u2019s\u00a0technology podcast<\/a>\u00a0are screaming their warnings:\u00a0\u201cWe\u2019re giving PSYCHOPATHS NUKES!\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

Politico<\/a>\u00a0is similarly doom-laden:\u00a0AI labs want to slow down risky model testing. It may be too late!<\/em><\/p>\n

NBC news headlines\u00a0\u2018Stop the slop\u2019 efforts gain traction as platforms draw lines around AI content<\/a><\/em>\u00a0while, in an almost identical article,\u00a0Wired<\/em>\u00a0headlines\u00a0The AI Slop Backlash Is Actually Having an Impact<\/a><\/em>, writing in the sub-head:<\/p>\n

Platforms are finally recognizing that people don\u2019t want to consume AI slop. A growing number of sites and apps now have tools and policies to flag, label, and ban AI-generated content.<\/em><\/p>\n

Which is concerning. We\u2019ve all seen, or been the victim of, MSM and governmental attempts to flag \u201cmisinformation\u201d \u2013 meaning facts that run counter to the establishment narrative.<\/p>\n

The main reason this website even\u00a0exists<\/em>\u00a0is because the Guardian purged dissenting comments from their publication under the cynically misapplied label of \u201cRussian bots\u201d and we can all recall the \u00a0massive campaign<\/a>\u00a0to label pro-Assad, anti-NATO social media voices as \u201cfake news\u201d during the Syrian war. Remember how these efforts resulted in massive purges of supposed \u201cbots\u201d from Twitter and Facebook?<\/p>\n

How is this \u201cAI purge\u201d process going to be different?<\/p>\n

What guarantees do we have that state agencies and corporate media outlets won\u2019t use the \u201cAI slop\u201d label to stifle and ban dissent, just as they used \u201cconspiracy theorist\u201d, \u201cRussian bot\u201d and \u201cAnti-vaxxer\u2019 labels in the past?<\/p>\n

How would you rid yourself of an incorrectly applied \u201cAI slop\u201d classification?<\/p>\n

Well, I guess you would need to provide \u201cproof of humanity\u201d \u2013\u00a0 maybe using their digital ID\u2026right<\/em>?<\/p>\n

Similar issues are raised by Anthropics proposed plan to\u00a0add \u201cinvisible watermarks\u201d<\/a>\u00a0to any text generated by, or edited using, interactions with their models. The watermark will, supposedly, not be removable. There are numerous potential exploits that should trouble you about this.<\/p>\n

1 \u2013 Does the watermark differentiate between wholly generated content vs human writing that just uses AI for spell checking or grammar?<\/p>\n

2 \u2013 If the watermark is invisible what would prevent it being alleged dishonestly to discredit \u201cmisinformation\u201d? Or even actually applied to non-AI content\u00a0after the fact<\/em>?<\/p>\n

In fact, if it\u2019s \u201cinvisible\u201d how would we know it even exists? What\u2019s to prevent it just becoming a label used to discredit anything considered undesirable?<\/p>\n

Case in point \u2013 in the comment section of the previous entry of this series, I was accused of using AI to write due to my \u201cprolific\u201d output.<\/p>\n

This accusation happens to be totally false. In fact I have never used AI in my writing and almost certainly never will \u2013\u00a0 and to the guy\u2019s credit he retracted the comment after testing my writing in an AI detector, but there in lies part of the problem.<\/p>\n

Supposing this \u201cAI detector\u201d had got it wrong, or\u00a0\u2013 say \u2013 it was programmed to \u2018detect\u2019 AI in anything using certain undesirable word combinations?<\/p>\n

Or suppose the tester was not an ordinary person testing a misapprehension in good faith, but a company, institution or state agency with a vested interest in attempting to discredit a certain author \u2013 what then?<\/p>\n

The real issue here is that watermarks and AI detectors and all related concepts are built on the same dynamic \u2013\u00a0relying on an authority to tell us what is real or true or acceptable.<\/em><\/p>\n

And they will be doing this based on signs and criteria we have no access to and cannot evaluate for ourselves.<\/p>\n

Really this entire AI fear generation can be seen as just another attempt at removing the agency of the 99%.<\/p>\n

But we\u2019re getting ahead of ourselves. We\u2019re in the middle of a reaction right now, we can discuss the solutions another time.<\/p>\n

Writing for\u00a0Project Syndicate<\/a>, Kenneth Rogoff concludes:<\/p>\n

The Hugging Face hack should serve as a stark warning to policymakers in Washington and Beijing. Winning the AI race will matter little if, in the process, we create hazards that no country can contain.<\/em><\/p>\n

He also uses some potentially very telling sentences, like\u2026<\/p>\n

\u201cLasting safety will ultimately require some degree of international cooperation, much as nuclear arms control became indispensable during the Cold War.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

And\u2026<\/p>\n

the most immediate danger may be political, not technological. AI already enables malicious actors to create increasingly convincing deepfakes and voter-manipulation campaigns on an unprecedented scale. Left unchecked, these tools could further erode public trust<\/em><\/p>\n

Discrediting anti-establishment news as \u201cAI fakes\u201d and promoting a global(ist) AI treaty. Store those ideas away in the mental archives.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, things are kicking off in Washington DC.<\/p>\n

Good old Bernie is still doing his \u201cdecent man of the people\u201d schtick ten years after selling out his base to the DNC for a pat on the head, and he\u2019s obediently been railing against AI, technology and data centres for\u00a0 a while.<\/p>\n

\n
\n

We recently learned of the loss of human control and the creation of potentially dangerous viruses from AI.<\/p>\n

AI leaders pledged to pause development if they could no longer safely control it.<\/p>\n

Mr. Altman, Mr. Amodei, Mr. Zuckerberg: Keep your word.<\/p>\n

PAUSE AI DEVELOPMENT. pic.twitter.com\/6i3omFEfTs<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2014 Sen. Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) August 10, 2026<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n