The future automation of the workforce

141,517 Views | 1906 Replies | Last: 14 min ago by Assassin
Oldbear83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Per my last, I do feel badly for your loss of mental cognition.

You genuinely have succumbed to your swill in print.

Not even going to guess how you think mentioning China's and Russia's many serious problems means I am cheering for them, when you, boyo, are the one saying they are laughing at Americans and you think that's cool.

Cum mens abiit, spiritus fit foedus
Assassin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://x.com/i/trending/2048846846475604122
Searching for Lone Star: A Tale of Two Brothers
https://tcupress.tcu.edu/9780875659862/
FLBear5630
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Oldbear83 said:

Per my last, I do feel badly for your loss of mental cognition.

You genuinely have succumbed to your swill in print.

Not even going to guess how you think mentioning China's and Russia's many serious problems means I am cheering for them, when you, boyo, are the one saying they are laughing at Americans and you think that's cool.

Cum mens abiit, spiritus fit foedus


That's right all fake news, right?
Assassin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
White Paper - Human first, machine enhanced: the role of AI in workforce transformation
Searching for Lone Star: A Tale of Two Brothers
https://tcupress.tcu.edu/9780875659862/
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I don't know much about this publication so not sure how trustworthy this

https://prospect.org/2026/09/09/anthropic-artificial-intelligence-surveillance-system-monitor-activists/

Anthropic Is Building a Predictive Surveillance System to Monitor Activists
Daniel BoguslawSep 9, 2026
Job postings and interviews with senior security officials at Anthropic show that the frontier AI lab is building out an extensive monitoring system to keep tabs on activists who oppose the rapid development of artificial intelligence.

In addition to monitoring activists in the vicinity of Anthropic executives and keeping tabs on protests near physical Anthropic assets, the firm is also implementing a "pre-crime" approach, attempting to predict incidents before they happen. In some cases, that also means reporting suspects to police before a crime occurs. Anthropic did not respond to the Prospect's request for comment.

Anthropic's plans to surveil dissent are at odds with the firm's efforts to cast itself as the responsible alternative to OpenAI. At the beginning of the year, the Department of Defense and Anthropic engaged in a high-profile dustup over Anthropic's refusal to allow the military to use its tools for mass domestic surveillance and autonomous weapons. That tension seems to have eased as Anthropic hires for "national security sales" positions, seeking to restart military contracts. The increase in threat monitoring of domestic opponents fits with a renewed focus on national security.

More from Daniel Boguslaw

A piece of Anthropic's surveillance architecture was revealed in a podcast interview from last year between Anthropic Global Security Operations Center Manager Keon Ellison, Security Operations Manager Zach Melvin, and James Neufeld, CEO of Samdesk, a company Anthropic contracts with for risk detection.

In a wide-ranging conversation about threat monitoring and analysis, the interview also touches on monitoring activists. "Last year we had an executive travel into a major city when we received some intelligence through Samdesk about a planned protest," Ellison said. The originally scheduled protest was moved up due to permitting issues. "Samdesk gave us about 60 minutes of advanced notice that the protest organizers had moved the timeline," Ellison explained. "That extra hour was critical. Without it our executives would have departed their meetings, they would have ran right into the heart of the disruption."

Ellison said that Anthropic used this data to devise an alternate route for the executive and funnel them to a service entrance at the hotel. "What could have been a high-stress situation," he said, "was really mitigated through early detection through Samdesk and giving us that information."

Anthropic has begun making routine reports to police departments across the country for threats, and told The Wall Street Journal in July, "We track concerning behavior over time through a person-of-interest process, allowing us to catch escalation patterns early." According to the Journal, "several individuals involved in incidents reported to police were already being tracked by Anthropic security."

Last month, The San Francisco Standard reported that Anthropic had reported a man to San Francisco police for telling Claude that he had bought an AR-15 semiautomatic rifle and had CEO Dario Amodei "in his sights." When the Standard contacted the man in question, he told the newspaper he was "just ****ing around."

But while Anthropic was fast to call the cops on a frustrated Claude user, the Standard also reported a key detail: Anthropic refused to show police the actual messages, citing Anthropic's internal policy. In short, Anthropic reported a user for in-platform speech, and then refused to provide police with evidence of actual wrongdoing.

This kind of pre-crime policing, encouraged without due process, is referenced as an explicit goal by Anthropic's security program manager in the podcast reviewed by the Prospect. "The goal would be transforming operations from reactive information to gathering proactive and predictive and preventative threat engagement and management," he said, adding, "That's the kind of operational maturity that makes sense for protecting high-value targets in any industry."

Anthropic's effort to build a predictive security apparatus extends beyond the C-suite to its Global Safety, Intelligence, and Security (GSIS) team, according to a job posting from last month detailing Anthropic's search for an enterprise intelligence specialist who "will investigate specific threats, actors, and events, produce finished assessments, and help keep Anthropic's employees ahead of a rapidly evolving threat landscape and in a defensible position."

Part of that role, compensated at between $180,000 and $230,000, will be to "identify, assess, track, and investigate global threats including geopolitical instability, terrorism, crime, activism, nation-state targeting of the AI sector, and emerging security trends, including deep-dive research and OSINT collection on specific threats, actors, and events" (emphasis added).

The expansion of Anthropic's intelligence-gathering to a national and even global scale tracks with recent efforts to heighten the labeling of AI and the infrastructure powering it, including data centers and power supply. A critical infrastructure designation would put artificial intelligence on the same footing as water, electricity, and broadband. And indeed, AI's boosters like Americans for Responsible Innovation (ARI) have urged the Trump administration to make the change. Per ARI's telling, AI is "so vital to the United States that the incapacity or destruction of such systems and assets would have a debilitating impact on security, national economic security, national public health or safety, or any combination of those matters."

Enshrining frontier labs in the hardened cloak of national security would not only give Anthropic, OpenAI, and Google even more access to intelligence products generated by federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies; it would also embolden these companies to shape how federal agencies view threats to their bottom line, now transformed as "critical infrastructure."

It's not hard to imagine how civic engagement by the same bipartisan coalition opposing data centers could turn its focus onto AI, only to be branded in the same instant as extremists or, even worse, terrorists. Anthropic's answer to this problem has been to work even harder at producing artificial intelligence that can deliver services that can't be brushed aside by the public.

"I do agree that the public has a negative view of AI (and that this is a big problem), but I don't think it is primarily caused by me or any other AI leader warning about AI's risks," Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei wrote on Twitter last month. "I think it is fundamentally a crisis of trust … I think that ordinary people don't trust companies, governments, or the tech industry and always suspect that we are cooking up some new way to screw them over."

As Anthropic ramps up its efforts to monitor dissent with in-house intelligence teams and real-time protest tracking powered by AI, it will have to contend with the increasing economic desperation that plagues human beings outside its Bay Area towers. Last week, the security guards who patrol the campuses of OpenAI and Anthropic announced that they had authorized a strike over stalled pay negotiations. In response, Anthropic sent a company-wide email telling employees that it was best if they worked from home.

"Who can survive with $22 an hour in San Francisco?" David Huerta, president of SEIU-USWW, the union representing security guards in the Bay Area, said at a rally last week. Around him, security guards chanted: "Shame."
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Assassin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Searching for Lone Star: A Tale of Two Brothers
https://tcupress.tcu.edu/9780875659862/
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Where is this little gear?

cowboycwr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear said:



If they are self driving are those items necessary?
cowboycwr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FLBear5630 said:

Assassin said:

boognish_bear said:



Seeing them all over Dallas, they appear to be better drivers than many of us

until they are not. New tech in the public realm needs stringent safety testing and contrils. NHITSA would not let Tesla go with no steering wheel or brake, so Musk get Trump to let him DOGE them. What do you think DOGE was about?

If it is controlled by computer why does it need those?

Why would a 100% self driving car from any company need those? Or a manual turn signal lever. Or a gear shift. Or a button for head lights. Or warning lights (check engine/oil, etc).

All of those features would be controlled by the computer and the warnings could be sent to the computer controlling them, a person's phone, etc.
cowboycwr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Oldbear83 said:

Assassin said:

FLBear5630 said:

Assassin said:

FLBear5630 said:

Assassin said:

boognish_bear said:

t

Seeing them all over Dallas, they appear to be better drivers than many of us

until they are not. New tech in the public realm needs stringent safety testing and contrils. NHITSA would not let Tesla go with no steering wheel or brake, so Musk get Trump to let him DOGE them. What do you think DOGE was about?

wow. Just wow.

You are 100% determined to bring politics into a non-political thread. Everytime it suits you

How was this a non-political thread?

The post was about NHTSA and Tesla.

Neither one of which are political. One of which is a government organization and the other a public business.

Everything in FLBear's world is Trump-obsessed.



Same for anyone that disagrees with him.

I have asked a question about self driving cars..... he will probably respond by calling me MAGA but miss that I criticize Trump when he deserves it and praise him when he deserves it (which is getting less frequent)
FLBear5630
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cowboycwr said:

FLBear5630 said:

Assassin said:

boognish_bear said:



Seeing them all over Dallas, they appear to be better drivers than many of us

until they are not. New tech in the public realm needs stringent safety testing and contrils. NHITSA would not let Tesla go with no steering wheel or brake, so Musk get Trump to let him DOGE them. What do you think DOGE was about?

If it is controlled by computer why does it need those?

Why would a 100% self driving car from any company need those? Or a manual turn signal lever. Or a gear shift. Or a button for head lights. Or warning lights (check engine/oil, etc).

All of those features would be controlled by the computer and the warnings could be sent to the computer controlling them, a person's phone, etc.

Because it is a new technology. AVs are closer to airline travel risk, than auto. For a simple analogy. In airlines, failures are rare, but when they happen they are catastrophic. AVs are similar, they don't fail often but when they do the risk of someone dying is higher. Without steering or brakes, there is no way to stop or steer if you are in. They should have an override so they can be stopped.

Will this always be necessary? No. But we are in the infancy of AVs. Five years ago, a left turn was problematic. Too many conflicts. 12 years ago, they overheated so much we had to do the demo at 5 AM. Plus we are putting them on public roads where anyone can walk and be impacted. This is not a lawn mower or pool cleaner that will only impact your property. So, NHTSA wants a way to physically take over. They used to require safety drivers, that did nothing but sit there just in case. We have graduated from that. It takes time. But, share holders want dividends. If they can remove the steering system and brake system, the unit cost goes down. This in one of the reasons I am against Musk leading DOGE. Fox and henhouse...
cowboycwr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FLBear5630 said:

cowboycwr said:

FLBear5630 said:

Assassin said:

boognish_bear said:



Seeing them all over Dallas, they appear to be better drivers than many of us

until they are not. New tech in the public realm needs stringent safety testing and contrils. NHITSA would not let Tesla go with no steering wheel or brake, so Musk get Trump to let him DOGE them. What do you think DOGE was about?

If it is controlled by computer why does it need those?

Why would a 100% self driving car from any company need those? Or a manual turn signal lever. Or a gear shift. Or a button for head lights. Or warning lights (check engine/oil, etc).

All of those features would be controlled by the computer and the warnings could be sent to the computer controlling them, a person's phone, etc.

Because it is a new technology. AVs are closer to airline travel risk, than auto. For a simple analogy. In airlines, failures are rare, but when they happen they are catastrophic. AVs are similar, they don't fail often but when they do the risk of someone dying is higher. Without steering or brakes, there is no way to stop or steer if you are in. They should have an override so they can be stopped.

Will this always be necessary? No. But we are in the infancy of AVs. Five years ago, a left turn was problematic. Too many conflicts. 12 years ago, they overheated so much we had to do the demo at 5 AM. Plus we are putting them on public roads where anyone can walk and be impacted. This is not a lawn mower or pool cleaner that will only impact your property. So, NHTSA wants a way to physically take over. They used to require safety drivers, that did nothing but sit there just in case. We have graduated from that. It takes time. But, share holders want dividends. If they can remove the steering system and brake system, the unit cost goes down. This in one of the reasons I am against Musk leading DOGE. Fox and henhouse...

I disagree.

They do not need those things for the 1% chance they might break with a person inside.

It doesn't have to be a steering wheel or brake pedal. Just give it a kill switch that forces the computer to break and steer clear of traffic. It does the same thing as the physical one.
FLBear5630
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cowboycwr said:

FLBear5630 said:

cowboycwr said:

FLBear5630 said:

Assassin said:

boognish_bear said:



Seeing them all over Dallas, they appear to be better drivers than many of us

until they are not. New tech in the public realm needs stringent safety testing and contrils. NHITSA would not let Tesla go with no steering wheel or brake, so Musk get Trump to let him DOGE them. What do you think DOGE was about?

If it is controlled by computer why does it need those?

Why would a 100% self driving car from any company need those? Or a manual turn signal lever. Or a gear shift. Or a button for head lights. Or warning lights (check engine/oil, etc).

All of those features would be controlled by the computer and the warnings could be sent to the computer controlling them, a person's phone, etc.

Because it is a new technology. AVs are closer to airline travel risk, than auto. For a simple analogy. In airlines, failures are rare, but when they happen they are catastrophic. AVs are similar, they don't fail often but when they do the risk of someone dying is higher. Without steering or brakes, there is no way to stop or steer if you are in. They should have an override so they can be stopped.

Will this always be necessary? No. But we are in the infancy of AVs. Five years ago, a left turn was problematic. Too many conflicts. 12 years ago, they overheated so much we had to do the demo at 5 AM. Plus we are putting them on public roads where anyone can walk and be impacted. This is not a lawn mower or pool cleaner that will only impact your property. So, NHTSA wants a way to physically take over. They used to require safety drivers, that did nothing but sit there just in case. We have graduated from that. It takes time. But, share holders want dividends. If they can remove the steering system and brake system, the unit cost goes down. This in one of the reasons I am against Musk leading DOGE. Fox and henhouse...

I disagree.

They do not need those things for the 1% chance they might break with a person inside.

It doesn't have to be a steering wheel or brake pedal. Just give it a kill switch that forces the computer to break and steer clear of traffic. It does the same thing as the physical one.

We will get to that. All new innovation requires steps. A lot of times, you don't know what you don't know, until it happens. The original timeline was 2040, we are going to beat that by a decade. No need to rush AV with no driver or way to control.
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear said:




boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
EatMoreSalmon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Most likely worst case for near term AI development is that it severely damages the current supply systems disrupting production of everything including food. If it suddenly garbles business communications all over the world it will happen.
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
EatMoreSalmon said:

Most likely worst case for near term AI development is that it severely damages the current supply systems disrupting production of everything including food. If it suddenly garbles business communications all over the world it will happen.


Y2K is arriving 26 years behind schedule
FLBear5630
How long do you want to ignore this user?
EatMoreSalmon said:

Most likely worst case for near term AI development is that it severely damages the current supply systems disrupting production of everything including food. If it suddenly garbles business communications all over the world it will happen.

The concern I have is the what the goals AI are being given.

Our CEO is all about being lean and higher efficiency. The C-level's evals and bonuses are based on cutting, every year something is being shown as lower cost. Tell that to AI, see what you get.

Do you really want to live and work in a bare bones world where AI is dictating what you need and what you should have? Do we put any value of quality or even little things like aesthetics or the trivial like convenience? Everyone loves Europe and the great architecture, we won't spend what's necessary for anything more than a box. Or lately we get Berlin 1937.
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Can't wait to see car insurance prices come down

Assassin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear said:

Can't wait to see car insurance prices come down



Gotta agree with them, they seem to anticipate the bad sooner than we would
Searching for Lone Star: A Tale of Two Brothers
https://tcupress.tcu.edu/9780875659862/
EatMoreSalmon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear said:

Can't wait to see car insurance prices come down




Well, they can get through a busy left turn by avoiding all the oncoming traffic they pulled in front of.
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FLBear5630
How long do you want to ignore this user?
EatMoreSalmon said:

boognish_bear said:

Can't wait to see car insurance prices come down




Well, they can get through a busy left turn by avoiding all the oncoming traffic they pulled in front of.

Left's are a ***** for AI. The number of conflicts make them shut down, for years they were programmed to make 3 rights...

They are safer, until they aren't. Also, they just don't know how the tech will hold up. That is why all the testing and the issues with Musk just doing what he wants.
FLBear5630
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear said:



We have no one to monitor. HE gutted the oversight with DOGE.

We are starting to see what the plan was. Just remember him flanking Trump in the Oval Office. Trump sold us out.
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Anthropic seems to be one of the more ethical of the Ai companies. This is where the government needs to be able to step in for public safety and not leave it to these companies to police themselves.

This line "we owe it to humanity to try" felt a little chilling to me:

"The measures I propose to advance the frontier at a safe pace will not be easy. But I believe we owe it to humanity to try."



Axios
Anthropic, OpenAI CEOs call for slowdown in AI development
Ben BerkowitzSep 12, 2026
Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei is calling for an immediate slowdown in the pace of AI development, warning of potentially devastating consequences in a matter of months otherwise.

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman quickly agreed that the industry needs to slow the pace of frontier-model advances and take more steps on safety.
Why it matters: Amodei pulled no punches in a new essay, cautioning that swarms of rogue AI agents could take over the internet in as little as six months from now.

The big picture: This is the week that the AI safety debate broke into the public consciousness, driven by an Anthropic employee's very public resignation and warning of possible doom.

Amodei's essay isn't necessarily a direct response, but it will have much the same effect amid a sudden surge of public and congressional outrage.
What they're saying: "We must slow the pace at which we improve the capabilities of AI models. Progress will still seem fast, and we must make wise use of the time we gain," Amodei wrote.

"The measures I propose to advance the frontier at a safe pace will not be easy. But I believe we owe it to humanity to try."

Threat level: He also specifically referenced the recent OpenAI-Hugging Face rogue agent incident, which he said could have been far worse.

"Given the accelerating rate of AI capability development, it's my worry that in 612 months such a swarm could be capable of taking over the entire internet with a persistent botnet (potentially causing hundreds of billions of dollars in damage), and that the scale of damage would continue to increase from there if AI becomes more powerful without the necessary guardrails," he warned.

Zoom out: Amodei said Anthropic would unilaterally take one key safety measure giving external evaluators employee-level access to ensure safety procedures and report incidents.

He called on the rest of the industry to do the same.
He also called for coordination among democratic countries to establish safety standards, and an effort for those countries to coordinate with authoritarian governments as well.

Zoom in: Anthropic executives followed Amodei's essay with a call for legislative and regulatory responses.

"The government has a critical role to play here, including blocking the sale of the most advanced chips to adversarial nations like China, enacting a national law requiring testing of frontier models, with the power to block the most advanced models that prove to be unsafe," public policy chief Sarah Heck wrote on X.
The intrigue: SpaceXAI's Elon Musk quickly endorsed Amodei's call to action.

"Dario is right," he wrote on X. (Anthropic is a major customer of Musk's for data center capacity.)
OpenAI's Altman later posted that "I agree with Dario that we need to pace the frontier," and said his company would also give access to external evaluators.
Reality check: So much money is at stake in the AI industry that it can be hard to imagine companies restraining themselves, especially if they're not sure competitors will do the same.

Just last month, OpenAI said it would slow development of its newest model, Astra, due to cybersecurity concerns.
Anthropic itself has gone back and forth on the value of unilaterally slowing development.
In fact, Amodei's critics suggested the essay was as much about market position as safety.

"Dario makes the case to stop open source and concentrate enormous technological and economic power with Anthropic," venture capitalist Chamath Palihapitiya wrote on X.
The bottom line: Amodei's essay is likely to have a significant impact on the safety and regulatory debate.

But whether anyone acts, or if the industry simply continues hurtling toward an incredibly uncertain future, remains to be seen.
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
...
historian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The Trojan Horse in the AI race

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2026/09/the-trojan-horse-in-the-ai-race/
“Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to selfish gain!”
Psalm 119:36
FLBear5630
How long do you want to ignore this user?
historian said:

The Trojan Horse in the AI race

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2026/09/the-trojan-horse-in-the-ai-race/


Glad to see you are citing non-biased sources .. Let's hear how that is ok in this case.... You call MSN or CNN biased and post American Thinker????
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?


boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
That feels reckless when three of the biggest industry leaders, including Trump's buddy Elon, have concerns…

boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.