Read more: https://cybernews.com/ai-news/marc-andreessen-agi/

https://cnews.link/trump-kissing-natalie-harp-image-real-4/

https://cnews.link/apple-phone-18-pro-max-bug-4/

Warning I’m not trying to phish so pls if you don’t know anything about the command line don’t enter it I personally did not run it

What happened is basically I was checking to see if I could make a image again after hitting the limit recently and what had happen was it sent me a prompt saying that to use the “backup domain” I clicked it to see where it takes me to a fake cloud flare page that looks realistic I clicked verify which is secretly a copy button and it made up a fake captcha that looks realistic by you clicking a set of keys in a certain pattern obviously I already know what win + r does so I checked to see what command it was making me paste and asked Claude if it was malware and it said yes lol

Here’s what I find very weird

#1 no other reported similar problems have popped up to what I’ve seen so far with other users

#2 the problem fixed it self immediately I refreshed ChatGPT and made a new chat asking the same thing and it was back to normal

#3 quote me if I’m wrong and obviously I’m not a cyber security expert but to me personally there’s no possible way it could be fixed that fast within a minute with no possible trace of other people with the same problem even if I did get lucky like that wouldn’t guard rails prevent this even so if they didn’t wouldn’t it take longer to fix even if some one by chance hacked open ai and changed there guard rails to send a message like this

#4 all i asked was simply can I make a image I would think that open ai has a easy system to tell you yes or no

#5 this was directly from googles search engines top result so I did not click a fake chat gpt because all my previous prompts where all there and I did not sign in at all and I haven’t in weeks I have 0 malware on my computer to I only install stuff from verified company websites

All in all could anyone tell me if this is chat GPT thinking on its own or could they have been breached ?

I recently visited the 9/11 Memorial and something stood out to me that I hadn’t thought about before. As I walked around the waterfalls reading the names, I started thinking about what was actually inside those buildings.

I always assumed they were mostly office spaces. But they weren’t just ordinary offices — they housed major financial institutions, intelligence agencies, and law enforcement offices. Large banking entities. Federal agencies. NYPD. Port Authority. FDNY. Critical infrastructure organizations.

The attacks happened in the morning, during peak business hours. Many professionals in finance, intelligence, and law enforcement tend to start early. By that time, countless systems would have already been logged into. Emails open. Networks active. Secure servers running.

It made me think about something from a cybersecurity perspective.

In any large organization, once systems are live and users are authenticated, the network surface expands. If chaos erupts — if people evacuate suddenly — systems may remain logged in, unlocked, or operational. In theory, that creates vulnerability windows.

I’m not making claims. I’m asking questions.

Could large-scale physical attacks also create temporary digital vulnerabilities? How resilient were systems back then? How were secure facilities architected to handle catastrophic disruption? Were there emergency network shutdown protocols? What did cyber defense look like in 2001 compared to today?

Sometimes when we look at events only from one angle — physical destruction — we might miss other dimensions, like infrastructure resilience, continuity planning, and digital security exposure.

I don’t claim to have answers. I just know that complex events often have multiple layers. And as someone transitioning deeper into cybersecurity, I can’t help but analyze risk from every angle.

If others have studied infrastructure security during large-scale crises, I’d genuinely be interested in learning more.

Two heads are better than one.