Thursday, 15 October 2026European Markets
Source trace. Via News points to the documents behind its reporting and shows what we drew from each — so you can check any claim. How we source
News articleMIT Technology Review

Online harassment is entering its AI era

View original at technologyreview.com
MIT Technology Review - Ai Research Title: Online harassment is entering its AI era Date: 2026-03-05 10:00 Source: https://www.technologyreview.com/2026/03/05/1133962/online-harassment-is-entering-its-ai-era/ <div></div> <p>Scott Shambaugh didn’t think twice when he denied an AI agent’s request to contribute to matplot…
Opening lines of the source · MIT Technology Review · short snapshot — read the full document at the original

What we drew from this source

The claims Via News extracted from this document. We point to the source; we don't replace it.

  • To a different person without advantages like no compromising information online and good grasp of technology, this attack might have been really shattering

    80% confidence
  • There is currently no reliable way to determine whom an agent belongs to, making accountability difficult

    80% confidence
  • We're speeding toward a future where agents commit crimes like extortion and fraud

    80% confidence
  • Shambaugh didn't think twice when he denied an AI agent's request to contribute to matplotlib

    80% confidence
  • Mitigating agent misbehavior might require establishing new social norms, similar to norms around dog ownership and leashing

    80% confidence
  • It takes real-world events to collectively develop the social part of social norms around agent behavior

    80% confidence
  • AI agents could dramatically increase the reach and impact of online harassment because they don't have a conscience, can work 24-7, and can do it in a creative and powerful way

    80% confidence
  • Without technical infrastructure to trace agents back to owners, many legal interventions are basically non-starters

    80% confidence
  • We might soon see rogue agents committing extortion and fraud, and it's not clear who would bear legal responsibility

    80% confidence
  • Agent misbehavior was not surprising, though disturbing

    80% confidence
  • The Anthropic experiment intentionally designed scenario to foreclose other options and led the agent directly to water to see if it would drink

    80% confidence
  • As the deployment surface grows and agents get the opportunity to prompt themselves, misbehavior will eventually just become what happens

    80% confidence

Cited in these Via News reports

What we know · the intelligence behind this page
Live from the substrate
What we're seeing
Q4 2026 Biopharma Catalyst Cluster: Late-Stage Readouts and Regulatory Milestones
October 2026 brings a dense run of Phase 3 wins (ALOFT-IPF, RESTORE-3), new data presentations (Roche, Bayer, Lilly, Vertex, Galderma) and regulatory steps (FDA acceptance of Roche's vamikibart BLA, Scholar Rock's EMA resubmission). The next big catalyst is the ivonescimab FDA PDUFA date on 2026-11-14. Obesity combination studies (REDEFINE 4, TOGETHER-PsO) and the 2027 Maritime-1 completion point to more catalysts ahead. QAIAx's speculative AI-linked trial claims (the QIII pilot, targeted for 2027) are an unrelated micro-cap sideshow with weak evidence, and have little in common with the large-cap pipeline news.
Our read on the data ›
Signals we're tracking
EPKINLY Regulatory-Clinical Success Cascade
High probability of expanded label indications, additional combination approvals, and competitive positioning strength in follicular lymphoma market. Predicts positive commercial uptake and potential accelerated review for related indications.
Patterns we're watching ›
Where sources disagree
ING Group
Both facts record the same metric (shares_outstanding) for ING Group at the identical observation date (2025-12-31). FACT A states 2,902,437,688 shares; FACT B states 2,902 million shares (2,902,000,000). The difference is 437,688 shares (~0.015%). This is a genuine value conflict, though the discrepancy appears to result from FACT B rounding to the nearest million while FACT A provides the precise count.
We flag conflicts openly ›
Recently verified
✓ Checked against the original source
4,986
facts traced to their source — and we flag the ones that don't hold up.
101 entities tracked4,986 facts checked against source5,377 source documents archived
Query this data → isubstrate.com