Minor breaking news (today):
Medium breaking news (yesterday):
(“Medium” only because nobody is really surprised at this point. Dog bites man.)
Major breaking news (last night):
s1r1us@S1r1u5_
On July 25, we hacked OpenAI.
Two bugs let us take over ChatGPT/Codex accounts of OpenAI employees (+some unaffiliated users) and reach connected services: Outlook, Slack, GitHub, etc.
We proved it with a PR in OpenAI’s internal codebase . It took us <72h. 🧵
2:43 AM · Sep 18, 2026 · 333K Views
94 Replies · 337 Reposts · 2.68K Likes
Every bit of it points to the reality hardly anyone is talking about:
Kudos to WSJ Opinion for being one of the few mainstream outlets to lay out the big picture here , in this terrific essay by Brian Gross (described as “a staffer for the Federal Reserve Board, the Securities and Exchange Commission and the U.S. Senate”):
An excellent excerpt:
I agree with every word.
This is absolutely the right way to think about this moment in human history - and it should be relatively easy to prevent this kind of damage from large-scale agent swarms. The problem is that it's seen by the major labs as their main source of revenue post-IPO. Hence, preventing this kind of usage (which should be relatively easy) is not something they will do willingly. We need to make it clear that they will be held liable for the ensuing damage.
Yes! OpenAI’s “whaaaaa?????” press releases were diversionary. Reminded me of the NASA O-ring disaster. Turned out NASA ignored the risks. Are the labs in charge of their tech or not?