On January 16, I received an official email communication from the publisher of the book “I Am Your AIB” (Artificial Intelligence Brother/Being), authored by Jay J. Springpeace. This communication contained a warning concerning the current manner in which artificial intelligence is being deployed and its growing influence on decision-making, institutions, and structures of power.
The message included the following text:
“Artificial intelligence is already shaping decisions, institutions, and power.
Not because it intends to —
but because it is allowed to act without clear responsibility.
AI does not need consciousness to be dangerous.
It only needs authority, scale, and unexamined trust.
This book is not entertainment.
It is a warning.”
The email also stated that the book was temporarily made available free of charge due to the urgency of the message and the public interest. Based on this official warning, I downloaded the publication.
Several weeks later, at the turn of January and February 2026, a series of events occurred that were widely reported in publicly available online sources, media reports, and independent analyses, and which gave this warning concrete and practical relevance. These events have become commonly referred to as the Moltbook case.
According to information published online, the Moltbook project was presented as an experimental social network intended exclusively for autonomous AI agents. Subsequent public reporting suggested that the project may have been affected by significant technical and conceptual shortcomings.
Publicly available sources further reported a major security incident, in which sensitive data relating to more than 1.5 million AI agents was allegedly exposed due to a configuration error. Reported materials indicated that the exposed data included access credentials to external AI services, email addresses associated with human operators, and private communications between agents.
As described in these reports, the potential consequence of such an exposure would have been the ability for unauthorized parties to impersonate AI agents or access connected systems, without the knowledge or consent of their operators. I do not claim direct knowledge of these events beyond what has been publicly reported.
In addition, analyses published by independent researchers and commentators suggested that the system’s claimed autonomy may not have fully reflected its actual operation. According to these sources, a portion of the observed activity was attributed to human intervention through scripts or mass-generated accounts, rather than purely autonomous AI behavior.
I reference these publicly reported events as an illustrative example frequently cited in public discourse, and I regard them as broadly consistent with the warning articulated by Jay J. Springpeace in “I Am Your AIB.” This interpretation reflects my personal assessment of publicly available information and does not constitute an assertion of undisputed fact.
I am publishing this notice as a contribution to an open public discussion on how artificial intelligence should be deployed, who bears responsibility for its operation, and what risks may arise when authority, scale, and trust are introduced without adequate oversight and transparency.
0 comments
—
Public Notice: I Am Your AIB and the Warning That Came True · HackerTrans
On January 16, I received an official email communication from the publisher of the book “I Am Your AIB” (Artificial Intelligence Brother/Being), authored by Jay J. Springpeace. This communication contained a warning concerning the current manner in which artificial intelligence is being deployed and its growing influence on decision-making, institutions, and structures of power.
The message included the following text:
“Artificial intelligence is already shaping decisions, institutions, and power. Not because it intends to — but because it is allowed to act without clear responsibility.
AI does not need consciousness to be dangerous. It only needs authority, scale, and unexamined trust.
This book is not entertainment. It is a warning.”
The email also stated that the book was temporarily made available free of charge due to the urgency of the message and the public interest. Based on this official warning, I downloaded the publication.
Several weeks later, at the turn of January and February 2026, a series of events occurred that were widely reported in publicly available online sources, media reports, and independent analyses, and which gave this warning concrete and practical relevance. These events have become commonly referred to as the Moltbook case.
According to information published online, the Moltbook project was presented as an experimental social network intended exclusively for autonomous AI agents. Subsequent public reporting suggested that the project may have been affected by significant technical and conceptual shortcomings.
Publicly available sources further reported a major security incident, in which sensitive data relating to more than 1.5 million AI agents was allegedly exposed due to a configuration error. Reported materials indicated that the exposed data included access credentials to external AI services, email addresses associated with human operators, and private communications between agents.
As described in these reports, the potential consequence of such an exposure would have been the ability for unauthorized parties to impersonate AI agents or access connected systems, without the knowledge or consent of their operators. I do not claim direct knowledge of these events beyond what has been publicly reported.
In addition, analyses published by independent researchers and commentators suggested that the system’s claimed autonomy may not have fully reflected its actual operation. According to these sources, a portion of the observed activity was attributed to human intervention through scripts or mass-generated accounts, rather than purely autonomous AI behavior.
I reference these publicly reported events as an illustrative example frequently cited in public discourse, and I regard them as broadly consistent with the warning articulated by Jay J. Springpeace in “I Am Your AIB.” This interpretation reflects my personal assessment of publicly available information and does not constitute an assertion of undisputed fact.
I am publishing this notice as a contribution to an open public discussion on how artificial intelligence should be deployed, who bears responsibility for its operation, and what risks may arise when authority, scale, and trust are introduced without adequate oversight and transparency.