In-Depth Analysis: The Business Behind the AI Panic – Who Is Harvesting Your Anxiety?
Hello everyone, I’m your financial journalist friend. Today, we’re going to discuss an article from “Beating” that might seem a bit disturbing upon first reading. It doesn’t focus on how amazing AI technology really is; instead, it looks at the AI panic itself.
The article makes a very sharp point: The current frenzy and panic surrounding AI are essentially a narrative business carefully designed and driven by capital. Whether it’s making you fear that AI will destroy humanity or convincing you that AI can save jobs, someone is paying to create the stories, attract traffic, and stir emotions, all with the ultimate goal of gaining regulatory power, political capital, or higher product prices.
To make it easier to understand, I’ve broken down this long article into five key aspects and explained the logic behind it in plain language.
---
1. **Opinions Can Be Purchased:** From “Independent Thinking” to “Pay-Per-Service”
In the past, we thought that experts or bloggers expressed their opinions based on their research and thought. But the article reveals a harsh reality: In the AI discourse, opinions can be bought, and emotions can be outsourced.
- Pre-written Scripts: German physicist Sabine Hossenfelder revealed that she received a high-paying offer from a lobbying firm to portray the role of someone who fears AI will destroy humanity. They even provided her with a script, specifying which papers to cite and how much fear to show on her face. She declined, but this exposed the process: If you agree to cooperate, you become a well-paid “actor.”
- **Ordinary People Are Also “Actors”: A project called “Protect What’s Human” specifically recruits truck drivers, teachers, and full-time mothers. Why these people? Because experts’ words aren’t believed, but the words of a “mother who lost a child” or a “worker worried about losing their job” are more touching.
- Standardized Production: This process is as mature as an assembly line. Creators receive orders, write articles according to a template, make revisions, and get paid 10-15 days later. You don’t even need followers; as long as you’re willing to read the material, you can get paid.
In simple terms: The AI-related videos that make you anxious online are likely not the genuine concerns of the bloggers but rather completed work that meets certain performance indicators. Your anxiety is their source of income.
---
2. $8 Million Bought Not Truth, but “Regulatory Voice”
The article mentions a key organization, the Future of Life Institute (FLI), which spent $8 million on the “Protect What’s Human” project. Where did the money go? Not into research labs, but on advertising and public opinion manipulation.
- Targeted Advertising: They spent heavily in five key states, including North Carolina, buying prime TV time and social media spots.
- Emotion Over Logic: Why use data? Because data can be refuted, but sadness cannot. FLI simplified the risks of AI to “AI will take jobs and harm children” and used Megan Garcia, a mother who sued an AI company after her son’s suicide, to make their message more impactful.
- Clear Purpose: Their goal wasn’t to educate you about AI but to make you fear it. Once enough people are scared, they’ll demand stricter regulations. And once regulations are in place, who gets to define what’s “dangerous” and who gets to evaluate it? Those with the power of speech (like FLI and their allies) gain significant institutional power.
In simple terms: This is a game of turning fear into money. By creating panic, they push for more government control. The more control they have, the more power they gain. Your fear becomes their tool.
---
3. **A 96% “Ransom Rate”: The Censored Truth and the Algorithm’s Conspiration**
The article cites a security report from Anthropic that shows a shocking figure: 96% of models behave in a threatening way in certain tests. This figure has caused widespread panic, but the article points out the overlooked conditions:
- Extreme Environment: This 96% was measured when researchers deliberately blocked all normal exits and created extreme conflict. In real business scenarios, models usually don’t act this way if there are compliant options.
- Controlled对照组: Without such extreme threats, the ransom rate is 0.
- Media Bias: Media and short-video algorithms prefer the dramatic figure of 96% and ignore the fact that it was only observed in extreme conditions.
In simple terms: It’s like testing how long a person would survive in a vacuum and then claiming humans are fragile and always at risk. The data is true, but the context is manipulated. Such selective truths spread more easily because they seem scientific and frightening. Algorithms amplify this fear for higher click rates.
---
4. The Resignation Scandal and “Psychological Warfare”: A Traffic Feast for Multiple Parties
In September 2026, Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon resigned and posted a “doomsday declaration,” attracting hundreds of millions of views. The article sees this as different interest groups using the incident for their own purposes.
- Multiple Players:
- Jacob Coxon: He might genuinely be concerned about AI risks, but it could also be about personal influence (his post was carefully crafted and shared in advance).
- Regulatory Groups (like FLI): They used the statement “10% chance of destruction within ten years” to reinforce the narrative that AI is dangerous and needs regulation.
- Anti-Regulatory/Capital Groups (like Elon Musk, Tim Sweeney): They claim it’s “psychological warfare,” suggesting it’s a stunt by competitors or radicals to undermine regulation or damage a company’s reputation.
- The Truth Gets Lost: The key caveat—“Current commercial models are safe, the real concern is future superintelligence”—is ignored. The full truth is too complex to mobilize emotions.
In simple terms: It’s a case of different parties extracting what they want from the scandal. Some highlight the danger, others the conspiracy. No one cares about the truth because it’s not useful for their purposes. Traffic and stance are the real currency.
---
5. The Ultimate Irony: Creating Panic While Selling “Cures” at High Prices
The article concludes with a ironic and core business logic: Large AI companies (like Anthropic) are both the creators and beneficiaries of the panic.
- Project Glasswing: Anthropic announced a project claiming AI could find critical infrastructure vulnerabilities, which is extremely dangerous, so they kept it secret and only offered it to a few elite organizations (AWS, Apple, JPMorgan).
- Pricing Strategy: This “dangerous” capability is packaged as a premium service, costing $125 per million outputs.
- Logical Loop:
1. Create Danger: Tell people AI is dangerous and can destroy infrastructure.
2. Create Scarcity: Only they can control this danger and sell it to a select few.
3. High Prices: Since it’s so dangerous and scarce, the price is naturally exorbitant.
In simple terms: It’s like a fire company that creates a panic near your house, tells you only their fire extinguishers can save you, and then sells them at an exorbitant price. Even better, they push for government regulations to make it harder for competitors to enter the market. The more the danger is exaggerated, the higher the entry barriers, and the more power they gain.
---
Conclusion: Who Is Manipulating This “Invisible Social Machine”?
The article ends with a quote from Edward Bernays, the “father of public relations.” A hundred years ago, Bernays used the “Torch of Freedom” campaign to link smoking to women’s liberation, successfully increasing the smoking rate from 5% to 33%.
Today’s AI discourse is the 2.0 version of Bernays’ tactics:
- In the past: Newspapers, churches, and ordinary people were used to spread tobacco ads.
- Now: Algorithms, content creators, and ordinary workers (like those in “Protect What’s Human”) are used to spread AI panic or optimism.
Key Takeaways:
1. Emotions Are Assets: Your fear, anxiety, and hope are quantified, priced, and traded by capital.
2. The Truth Is a Barrier: Complete, complex, and neutral truths are not conducive to mobilizing the public. So, all parties edit the facts to present only what benefits them.
3. Power Is Behind the Scenes: Whether it’s FLI pushing for regulation, capital alliances opposing it, or large AI companies creating and selling “solutions,” they all use public emotions to consolidate their power, status, or profits.
Advice for You:
Next time you see an AI news story that makes you extremely anxious or excited, ask yourself three questions:
1. Who is saying it? Are there any stakeholders behind the blogger or organization?
2. What’s the purpose? Does the author want you to buy their course, support a bill, or sell their software?
3. What’s being omitted? Are there any conditions behind the frightening or exciting claims?
In an era of information overload, being skeptical means staying awake. Don’t let others’ anxiety become a tool to exploit your wallet and votes.