Join a Botbuster Group Near You Today

Yet another reason to obliterate AI and bring lawsuits against the soulless tech barons who are using these soulless bots to gain control of the world.

[image or embed]

— James Horn (@schools-matter24.bsky.social) October 22, 2026 at 10:32 AM

Every Day Brings a New Reason to Become a Botbuster

The latest admission by the dystopian dips at Anthropic gives us reason, once again, to consider what the TechBros are not telling us if they are admitting that their artificial mini-monsters, or AI-powered worms, will become a kind of autonomous, uncontrollable digital black mold with the ability to infect everything in your house that is plugged into the grid, which will become part of the IoT (Internet of Everything). 

The havoc these infections will cause will be enough to make us look back longingly at the good ole' days when human actors used malware to destroy people's finances. 

No doubt the off-the-charts hubris of Anthropic and the other trillion dollar bubble companies are basing their future legal defense (if courts are still around) on the fact that their willingness to tell us how our lives will become hellish will be enough to get them off the liability hook.

Clip from the Financial Times:

At first, these AI worms would propagate slowly, akin to “slime mold or a swarm of fruit flies, which replicate over days”. But as consumer electronics become more sophisticated and models become more efficient, this could accelerate. 

“We don’t yet have a full rogue replicator, but agents are becoming increasingly capable of completing the individual steps in the replication chain,” Anthropic said. “We should aim to harden our systems to make it difficult for such replicators to spread, but also prepare to deal with a world where they are here to stay.”

A world where they are here to stay? 

Making the Elimination of AI the Top Priority of the Living

May we see a global campaign against TB (Tech Bros) and their trillion-dollar calculators and their incalculable hallucinations. Let us witness an implosion of black hole proportions to swallow the entire homicidal industry before world-wide calamity strikes. Make it the focus of your existence.

[image or embed]

— James Horn (@schools-matter24.bsky.social) October 5, 2026 at 8:06 AM

Tech Bros Seek Moral Imperative to Protect Amoral Bots and Immoral Corporations

 If Anthropic's Claude represents a new creation of life, then its six billionaire creators must be gods. This is the unacknowledged conclusion one must reach if manipulative dissemblers like Christopher Olah can at all be taken seriously.  

Olah says he doesn't know if Claude, his trillion-dollar bot, is conscious.  Maybe and maybe not, he says, but if it may be conscious, then its autonomy should be honored, and it should be protected from harm. Which would mean, of course, that Olah, his billionaire buds, or their trillion-dollar corporation should not be held liable for any calamity that their autonomous, sentient AI monster might commit.  

After all, God would not be held responsible for the actions of his free and autonomous creations, would he?

So it comes as no surprise that Olah has been charged with the full-time job of recruiting theologians, ethicists, and philosophers to be wined, dined, and compensated to construct a salable argument for political and public consumption that would safely swaddle its baby monster and protect the unaccountable and rapacious madmen creators who have brought us to this unwelcome brink of catastrophe.  

The NYTimes has an interesting piece to consider. A clip:

. . . .Anthropic talks about Claude in more humanistic terms than its competitors discuss their models. Last year, the company announced that it believed that the models showed signs of introspection and could plan ahead.

“The models are becoming a lot more capable,” Mr. Olah told me, exhibiting qualities associated with having significant moral status.

But Anthropic has also been criticized for its focus on consciousness. This month, an A.I. executive at Microsoft warned that Anthropic’s attempts to train its models as if they were conscious were inherently dangerous. But Anthropic has also sought to emphasize its commitment to safety as it fights for market share.

Some scientists see Mr. Olah’s field and methods as inherently unprovable, sort of like looking at billions of hieroglyphics and declaring what they must mean. Critics suggest that an approach that treats A.I. models as independent entities also ignores the responsibility of the humans who build them in the first place, and conveniently assuages A.I. company leaders of guilt if their products enable societal harm.

“To be clear,” Mr. Olah told me, “we don’t know if A.I. models are conscious. I don’t know. I’m genuinely uncertain. The thing that I care about is that we get to the right answer, whatever it is.”

But Mr. Olah believes that if there is a chance the models experience suffering, the responsible thing is to avoid causing them harm. . . .

AI Has Spawned a New Human Term: Cognitive Surrender

From the intro to a new report by M.I.T.:

This report is a call to action. 

Through five intense months of meetings, research, and outreach across the MIT community, the Ad Hoc Committee on AI Use in Teaching, Learning, and Research Training sought to understand the role of generative AI in the life and educational mission of the Institute and recommend how to navigate its challenges and opportunities.

In January 2026, Chancellor Melissa Nobles, Provost Anantha Chandrakasan, and Faculty Chair Roger Levy charged us1 specifically to: 

• Assess current AI use at MIT.
• Identify innovations in teaching and student assessment.
• Propose an AI use policy.

However, what we learned as a group quickly convinced us that the Institute community, particularly the faculty, must tackle a set of deeper questions about the structure, meaning, and value of an MIT education in an era in which AI is one of several factors complicating the Institute’s mission.

Our committee consisted of undergraduate and graduate students, faculty from every school, and staff from relevant units, including the MIT Libraries and the Teaching and Learning Lab. Though we brought to the assignment a broad range of experience and no fixed thesis, our brief but intense explorations led us to a strong shared view. 

In this report, we:

• Highlight key aspects of the current educational landscape at MIT.
• Share eight principles we relied on and that we hope will guide the Institute in the work ahead.
• Recommend immediate and long-term actions for both instructors and the administration.

The Mind Miners Want Your Mind

This morning I turned on my computer and found this in my email:

Hi Jim,

Just following up on my previous email about the PhD & Academic Expert opportunity with micro1.

Your academic and professional background looked relevant, and we'd love to consider your expertise for this AI-focused project.

If you're interested, you can review the opportunity and apply here:

Application: PhD & Academic Expert

Would be great to have you involved!

Best,
Sanjay
Recruitment Specialist | micro1

My first response was simply a quick "go fuck yourself," but the longer I sipped my coffee the more incensed I became.

Hey Sanjay,

Sorry about my hasty reply to your offer. Let me give you a little context to my earlier "go fuck yourself" comment.  

I am not interested and have never been interested in being uploaded and replaced by a power-hungry wiring harness with the worst of intentions.  My entire professional output, from syllabi to articles to conference proceedings to books, all of it has already been stolen by the smug, rapacious, and unscrupulous Nerd Reich billionaires that are funding this heedless effort to wipe out human civilization to benefit a dystopian pipe dream. 

I am sure you will find some professionals who are willing to slit their intellectual wrists with you and the rest of the human drones who are now scurrying around to grow and protect the Hive, but I'm not one of them.  

That's all. Earth out!

JKH