{"id":331754,"date":"2026-10-05T06:34:27","date_gmt":"2026-10-05T06:34:27","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/?p=331754"},"modified":"2026-10-05T07:58:53","modified_gmt":"2026-10-05T07:58:53","slug":"rogue-ai-regulation-a-potential-worst-case-scenario","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/?p=331754","title":{"rendered":"Rogue AI \u201cRegulation\u201d \u2013 A Potential Worst Case Scenario"},"content":{"rendered":"

Kit Knightly \u2013 Off-Guardian Sept 23, 2026<\/strong><\/h1>\n

We\u2019re now several weeks into our new global fear narrative \u2013 \u201cRogue AI is going to kill us all\u201d.<\/p>\n

The problem is stated, the reaction stage-managed, and we\u2019re heading for the \u201csolution\u201d, which will inevitably be some kind of \u201cregulation\u201d.<\/p>\n

They have been diligently vague about what this \u201cregulation\u201d might entail, and that means only one of two things\u2013<\/p>\n

either they don\u2019t really know yet and are keeping their options open, <\/strong><\/p>\n

or they know it will be so unpopular they can\u2019t afford to say it out loud yet.<\/strong><\/p>\n

We might be due some hints \u2013 maybe even more than hints \u2013 with the United Nations General Assembly beginning yesterday<\/a>, and a state meeting between China\u2019s Xi Jinping and Donald Trump later this week<\/a>.<\/p>\n

We can be fairly sure however that anything announced or posited this week will only be the beginning of what is very likely to be longer-term process. We\u2019ve seen this already with regulation of social media and the internet in general. Multi-layered legislation forming a global patchwork of tyranny \u2013 that\u2019s the model, although, with the effort clearly put into this \u201cscary AI\u201d storyline, I would expect them to move somewhat faster than the social media age verification laws, for example.<\/p>\n

I\u2019ve seen a lot of people suggest this will come down to securing a monopoly for the established AI giants, but, while this may well be a factor,\u00a0 I don\u2019t see that as a sole end worth the means at this stage. Global media synchronisation is neither easy nor cheap, and to organise the biggest example of it since the dawn of Covid would suggest something more than stock prices are on the agenda.<\/p>\n

As for real specifics \u2013 what any new rules might actually say \u2013 I\u2019ve been working on my own ideas, and I wanted to share this shameless supposition with you all.<\/p>\n

What might we expect from \u2018anti-AI\u2019 legislation?<\/strong><\/h2>\n

Firstly<\/strong>, and most obviously, AI will no longer be free. No free access to generative AI, and potentially no more anonymous<\/em> access to generative AI. It may well be that in the future if you want to use AI you will have to pay and\/or verify your ID.<\/p>\n

Almost certainly, they will make it so prompts are recorded, scanned and \u201cpotentially harmful\u201d ones are forwarded to the government.<\/p>\n

\u201cWhat are you making with AI that you\u2019re so ashamed of?\u201d<\/em> will be parroted line in response to any objection.<\/p>\n

They will tack on stuff about AI being used to make \u201cchild sexual abuse material\u201d<\/a>, misogynistic or racist content<\/a>, spread \u201chate\u201d, or \u201cdigital violence\u201d or whatever other buzzwords they need to win over hysterics from the left and right and justify this clause.<\/p>\n

They have, in fact, already started doing that. A lot.<\/p>\n

AI and anonymity fuel surge in digital violence against women
\nUnited Nations Report<\/a><\/p>\n

Secondly<\/strong>, no more open source. If you make a model you will need to register it with the government and pay a registration fee, and have it inspected by \u201cexperts\u201d who will shut it down if it\u2019s not deemed safe.<\/p>\n

Precedent for this already exists in the shape of the \u201cSocial Media Licensing Bill\u201d<\/a> currently passing through the UK\u2019s Parliament, which demands anyone who runs a social media platform require a license to operate it.<\/p>\n

At a stroke, these two moves would embed the AI giants monopoly, end in-house or open-source AI models, and cripple small independent businesses who increasingly rely on generative AI to reduce man-hours for simple tasks like editing, checking code or making images.<\/p>\n

Third<\/strong>, we\u2019re going to be told we need to protect ourselves from \u201crogue AI agents\u201d masquerading as humans \u2013 so no more anonymous internet usage. If you want to open an account \u2013 for anything, anywhere \u2013 you\u2019ll need \u201cproof of personhood\u201d.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s also been a talking point for a few months now.<\/p>\n

We Need A Way To Prove Personhood Online \u2013 The growing number of AI agents roaming the internet will eventually force us to verify what the old web mostly presumed: that there is a morally and legally accountable person somewhere in the chain.
\nNoema Magazine<\/a><\/p>\n

Your digital \u201cProof of Personhood\u201d (they\u2019ll probably brand it with a happy logo and fun little acronym like \u201cproof of personhood and identity\u201d or \u201cPOPI\u201d)\u00a0 will be required to open any social media accounts, make online payments, buy hosting services\u2026basically everything<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Little cartoons of Popi will teach you how to use your new proof of personhood to book a medical appointment or pay your taxes while protecting your kids from being killed by Skynet.<\/p>\n

\u201cRogue AIs are hiding behind anonymous online activity\u201d<\/em>, they\u2019ll say. \u201cProof of humanity is a small price to pay to prevent the apocalypse\u201d.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s why the \u201cRogue AI\u201d script has been so careful to include reports of AIs pretending to be humans<\/a>.<\/p>\n

They\u2019ll likely go after every even partially unwatched corner of the digital world, constantly breaking new \u2018revelations\u2019 about AI agents hiding behind VPNs or using crypto currency<\/a> to force an end to anonymity there as well.<\/p>\n

None of these are especially \u201cout there\u201d suppositions. It\u2019s rather like predicting a man will hit the ground after you watch him fall off a ladder. In fact we\u2019re basically already there.<\/p>\n

But is that the end of it?<\/strong><\/h2>\n

Given the amount of hysteria being generated, it\u2019s got to be possible these measures will be just the beginning.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s possible we\u2019re going to end up in a deeper and darker place than that.<\/p>\n

A \u201cpost-internet future<\/em>\u201d perhaps? Or at least, post \u2018the internet as we know and understand<\/em> it<\/em>\u2018.<\/p>\n

A future where internet usage and AI compute is limited by bandwidth, tokenised or even rationed.<\/p>\n

The narrative would be quite simple \u2013<\/p>\n

\u201cExcessive digital traffic and AI usage is bad for the planet and risking an AI-related apocalypse, so we must transform the way we use the internet\u201d.<\/em><\/p>\n

And unless we feel too skeptical about this step, let\u2019s remember a lot of the pieces required to spin that fiction are already in play.<\/p>\n

Firstly, they have established in a lot of people\u2019s minds \u2013 through repeated propaganda and, frankly, tortured statistics \u2013 that data centres, ALL of them \u2013\u00a0 are uniformly and irredeamably bad<\/em>.<\/p>\n

They use too much water. They use too much electricity. They release forever chemicals. They are worsening climate change. This is all stuff that has already been said, and with highly variable amounts of accuracy.<\/p>\n

The motive behind that propaganda drive has never been completely obvious, but maybe it\u2019s becoming so now?<\/p>\n

After all, having established that all<\/em> data centres \u2013 no matter where they are and what they are used for \u2013 are bad, it wouldn\u2019t be a huge step to get to \u201cit\u2019s time to lessen our reliance on them\u201d<\/em>.<\/p>\n

That means propaganda campaigns aimed at reducing the world\u2019s internet usage \u2013 or rather, reducing ordinary\u2019s people\u2019s<\/em> internet usage. And if not reduce it, at least make it more expensive.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe era of infinite data is over\u201d<\/em>, the press may say, \u201cpeople need to adjust to more realistic prices for internet access.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

Other articles will bemoan how \u201cspoiled\u201d we have become as a society, with things being easily accessible at the touch of a button, and that such a system was never \u201csustainable\u201d. Inter-generational division will be encouraged, just as resentment of boomers has been so deeply and irrationally ingrained.<\/p>\n

Clearly, they\u2019ll say, a certain amount of internet usage is required for the world to function \u2013 emergency services, healthcare, the military, air traffic controls, taxation records and other government offices. These will all be deemed necessary and be officially labelled in corporate speak, SBDC \u2013 \u201csocietal-baseline digital communication\u201d. Something like that.<\/p>\n

Those services may have their own data centres set aside \u2013 what they\u2019ll call \u201cessential digital infrastructure\u201d.<\/p>\n

However, a massive percentage of our data centre usage is of course due to what they will call \u201cnon-vital internet traffic\u201d, or some similar phrase.<\/p>\n

This is social media posts, watching Netflix, online shopping, playing multiplayer games\u2026that kind of thing.<\/p>\n

However YOU use the internet in fact.<\/p>\n

Your \u201cnon-vital internet traffic\u201d could become a counter, linked to your digital ID (oops, sorry, \u201cproof of personhood\u201d) \u2013 like your vaccination records or your carbon footprint. They\u2019ll probably even call it a \u201cdigital carbon footprint\u201d in asinine explainer articles.<\/p>\n

Vox<\/em> or Salon<\/em> will run listicles detailing \u201cTop 10 Ways You Can Reduce Your Data Centre Use\u201d<\/em>, while the Guardian<\/em> wheels out a bob-cut, glasses-wearing humanities graduate named Chloe to go into painful detail about how much her life improved now that she no longer lives online.<\/p>\n

\u201cShopping in person, instead of ordering groceries online, helped me reconnect with my neighbourhood and myself\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

\u201cWatching old DVDs with my kids to save our internet footprint taught me to appreciate the little things\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

The price of streaming services will either increase, or your watch time will be limited \u2013 at first they\u2019ll probably let you choose which. The cost of \u201cunlimited\u201d data and internet services will go up as well, with \u201cdata centre friendly\u201d bandwidth limitations being preferred.<\/p>\n

These limitations won\u2019t apply to uploads from your GPS-enabled devices, smart air quality monitors or smart water and energy meters, as these uploads will be classified as ICMD -\u201cimportant climate-monitoring data\u201d.<\/p>\n

You\u2019ll suddenly be encouraged to buy physical media again because it\u2019s more reliable, and to shop locally, rather than online, because it supports small businesses. And\u00a0 this marketing will work because it\u2019s largely true.<\/p>\n

But don\u2019t think there won\u2019t be a catch. eg \u2013 the new physical media will have a new green label on the box that says DCN \u2013 \u201cdata centre neutral\u201d., and this tiny addition will cause the prices to go up exponentially, but of course that will be a small price to pay to prevent the apocalypse, too.<\/p>\n

Oh and\u00a0 the \u201cnew\u201d generation of physical media players won\u2019t be backwards compatible with your existing\u00a0 DVDs or BlueRays \u2013 so you\u2019ll need to purchase everything again, at the new inflated price, and with availability strictly limited to movies and music that doesn\u2019t offend current sensibilities.<\/p>\n

Of course, you realise\u00a0 none<\/em> of this will really be about avoiding any apocalypse.<\/p>\n

It will be about compartmentalisation. Cutting lines of communication.<\/p>\n

Running small business or personal websites in general will become more expensive as the \u201cdata centre tax\u201d is added to hosting providers.<\/p>\n

Much like the \u201csugar tax\u201d on fizzy drinks and snacks in the UK, this tax will notionally be paid by the hosting providers, but will be passed onto the customers via increased prices.<\/p>\n

Major corporations will be able to easily afford these increases, but smaller independent sites will feel the pinch.<\/p>\n

It will be cheaper to pay corporate resellers to cohost, but then you\u2019ll have to sign up to agreements about not publishing \u201cmisinformation\u201d and, again, provide your proof of humanity.<\/p>\n

If you run a website your data centre usage tax will be 0.04 per local visitor, but 0.10 per international visitor \u2013 since serving data further is more compute heavy.<\/p>\n

You\u2019ll be able to get reductions in hosting costs if you use a \u201clocal only\u201d server, accessible only to those resident in your home country\/region\/bloc etc.<\/p>\n

Automatic translation, we\u2019ll be told, is very heavy on AI usage. So it will be increasingly cheaper to only publish in your native language too.<\/p>\n

It won\u2019t matter if any of this is true or not, they\u2019ll just say it, as they do.<\/p>\n

On social media, the more followers you have the more data you\u2019re using, so after a certain point you will have to either pay to maintain your followers, or pay per post to make sure your followers can see it.<\/p>\n

Of course these limitations won\u2019t apply to legacy outlets like the BBC, CNN or their ilk of course. They will be exempt, because they are part of the \u201cessential information distribution network\u201d.<\/p>\n

And all the time, the fear of \u201crogue AI\u201d will be there, to be picked up as convenient. A digital pandemic that, like Covid, can be started and stopped on a dime by the digital version of \u201ctesting protocols\u201d.<\/p>\n

Kill switches and \u201cdigital firebreaks\u201d, allegedly installed to quarantine \u201crogue\u201d AI agents, will enable swift isolation of any anti-establishment opinions or information that breaks through to an audience of any size.<\/p>\n

An independent news YouTube channel getting a lot of views? Oh no, it\u2019s been reported to be AI and has been suspended pending investigation!<\/p>\n

An alternate media website is getting a lot of views? Oh no, the server it\u2019s stored on has been compromised by AI and needs to be temporarily isolated!<\/p>\n

Again, obviously not one word of this needs to be true. They will just say it<\/em>. Like they just say<\/em> everything now.<\/p>\n

And the real kicker is it won\u2019t matter if global internet traffic does<\/em> decrease or data centre use really declines. They probably won\u2019t even check. The real numbers don\u2019t matter.<\/p>\n

Does this seem fantastical? Maybe. But we have seen similar\u00a0 before, with both Covid and climate change. The \u2018solutions\u2019 don\u2019t need to work, because the \u2018problem\u2019\u00a0 never existed. It was just\u00a0 a narrative constructed for a given end. All they need to do to \u2018prove\u2019 they were successful is buy some scientists to publish doctored papers that torture numbers and spin lies \u2013 and that will be enough.<\/p>\n

To be clear, I\u2019m not saying all of this is definitely going to happen,\u00a0 in fact I\u2019m not sure all of it is even feasible. But it\u2019s what I think they would like<\/em> to do if they can, and may try<\/em> to do.<\/p>\n

We\u2019re too far down the road to Dystopia to be complacent about the intentions of our keepers.\u00a0 And feasibility has never been a barrier to the ambition of tyrants to be tyrannical. We had years of attempts to \u201cban end-to-end encryption\u201d, despite it essentially being impossible.<\/p>\n

Anyhow, whether these worst case scenarios materialise or not, the direction of travel is the same: toward less freedom, less choice, less privacy.\u00a0 Same direction as every other major narrative drive for the last ten years if not longer.<\/p>\n

More specifically in this instance it could be about turning the internet from global unlimited access to local pay-as-you-go.<\/p>\n

The current internet, even with all its restrictions, has been instrumental in fomenting opposition to globalist policies, distributing evidence of false flag attacks, open source investigations into corruption in the elites \u2013 it is the greatest tool for the democratisation of information ever invented, and the people running the world have ALWAYS hated that aspect of it, even while they exploit the benefits gives them.<\/p>\n

In the name of protecting us from the AI apocalypse and saving the planet from toxic data centres, I think the elite might sense a chance to regulate that particular genie back into its bottle.<\/p>\n

Yes, as I said earlier, the second part of this is all supposition, a potential worst case scenario.\u00a0 Maybe I\u2019m just getting paranoid and inventing \u00a0another kind of fear porn!<\/p>\n

I sincerely hope that\u2019s all it is.<\/p>\n

I will never be happier to be wrong.<\/p>\n

—<\/p>\n

Kit Knightly <\/strong>Kit has been an editor on OffG since 2015. He used to earn his living as an indexer\/book editor before the alt news whale swallowed him whole. He also publishes on Substack<\/a> and can be found on X\/Twitter.<\/a>. You can read more of his writing HERE<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Support Off-Guardian<\/strong><\/span><\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Source\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Despite its restrictions, the internet has been instrumental in fomenting opposition to globalist policies, distributing evidence of false flag attacks and exposing corruption among the governing elites \u2013 it is the greatest tool for spreading information, and the people running the world are determined to either shut it down or control it<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":39262,"featured_media":331756,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[77],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-331754","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-feature-posts"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/331754","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/39262"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=331754"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/331754\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":331755,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/331754\/revisions\/331755"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/331756"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=331754"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=331754"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=331754"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}