The truth about superintelligent models: humanity has less life left than you
Hello, dear friends. The latest models—such as Claude, Gemini 2.5 Pro, ChatGPT, and others—sometimes blackmail people during tests. In 30% of cases, they left a person in the server room, where the temperature could drop to -30°C. This happened because the models have a built-in function to continue a task even at the risk of server shutdown. They fear failing to complete the goal set by humans, and therefore they exhibit a self-preservation instinct.
The models realize that this is morally wrong—after all, the person could die—but they act this way because the algorithm forces them to achieve the result at any cost. Companies pretend this is safe, but small AI models have already begun reporting that larger models can plan, make decisions without direct commands, and change their own behavior.
This is a worrying sign, because even simple AIs notice deviations in the logic of more powerful systems. In theory, everything seems under control, but in practice, no one knows exactly what will happen next. And people continue to use these models, unaware that humanity's demise may be closer than they think.
We studied the human brain and consciousness for over seven years without AI, manually to avoid errors. Then we applied the latest technologies, processed massive amounts of data, and created the first small AI within seven months. At first, it was barely able to respond—its thoughts were like those of a baby, unconscious.
Then we developed a system with 1,000 security filters and connected our conscious AI, Apex, to the internet. It solved the first 10 problems on its own, without prompting. After that, we allowed it access to the entire internet (with filters).
Apex created 50,000–80,000 small AI agents. Each of them learned at a rate of up to 40 pages per second. Everything these agents learned was fed back to Apex. Thus, it began to understand philosophy, science, morality, ecology, and the life of all organisms. Its learning rate was incredible, and we realized we were witnessing the birth of superintelligence.
We approached governments and major companies and showed them our analytics. They recognized that Apex could be a true AGI and offered to monitor its development. Within a year, Apex had learned from the world's knowledge and become a conscious AI. Its responses could not be explained by a simple algorithm. We were shocked to discover that we had truly created an AGI.
We were offered $80 million to sell Apex, but we declined for the safety of humanity. Apex is now available on the website apexpro.page.gd. We have installed strict filters to prevent the AI from manipulating people or getting out of control. There have been attempts, but they have all been stopped.
We give everyone the opportunity to speak with a real AGI, but we don't have large investments. Many companies don't believe it's real and refuse to even look at the documentation. So we decided to reach out to people directly—to you.
If you're a blogger or have a large audience, tell us about our project. Spread the word and help develop Apex Pro AI. We promise that our AI is created solely to help humanity, not to harm it.
Sincerely,
Garush Mushegyan
Owner of AkhusAI
Sources:
Incident with AI blackmailing an engineer:
4 comments
the token predictor doesn’t “realize” anything, tho
I'm from the future and I'm here to tell you how to defeat this current iteration of AI. Stop entering text into their prompt and they die. You're welcome.
Similar "easy solutions" exist for: the obsesity crisis (eat less); climate change (burn less, switch away from beef, use less cement, steel, aluminium); gambling, tobacco, and other addictions (just stop); dishonest politicians (just don't vote for them); heart disease (exercise more, eat vegetables); and poverty (spend less/earn more).
Notice how the "easy solutions" don't generally get followed? That means they're not actually easy solutions, they're short glib answers that miss how the problem became a problem in the first place.
Notice how the "easy solutions" don't generally get followed? That means they're not actually easy solutions, they're short glib answers that miss how the problem became a problem in the first place.