Roads across America are in danger of a remote controlled Tesla causing distribution, damage and even death.

“Due to reasons under investigation, the Tesla lost control as it attempted to overtake a vehicle in the right lane by using the off-ramp from 12th Street,” state police said. “As a result, the Tesla struck the right side of the Freightliner. The left side of the Freightliner then struck the right side of the Equinox.”

The impact caused the Equinox to go over the concrete median and across northbound traffic, police said.

The out-of-control Chevy SUV then struck a 2021 Ford F-150XLT pickup truck in the right northbound lane, investigators said. The force of impact caused the Ford pickup truck to flip onto its side and slide across the other northbound lanes.

Chain reactions like this, caused by a single small action, are the kind of asymmetric warfare service that Tesla will offer foreign and domestic threats.

The Guardian describes how and why Russians bought Twitter in order to platform domestic terrorism in America.

Ken McCallum, the head of MI5, the UK’s domestic intelligence service, publicly stated earlier this month that Russia was responsible for “arson, sabotage” and other “actions conducted with increasing recklessness” on European and British soil.

In a September announcement on SimpleX, a newly adopted encrypted chat service for some far-right extremists, the Base told its recruits to consume their content via its VK account, the Russian version of Facebook, or its Rutube channel.

And in a series of September and October VK posts where it describes the “process for joining the Base in [the] USA”, the group also curiously dropped a new email with a Mail.Ru address – the email provider of a well-known ally of the Russian president, Vladimir Putin.

The British have it figured out. And while many examples are about Americans moving to Russia, and opening Russian accounts, it’s clear the Russian acquisition of Twitter was a targeted plan to instigate violence and interfere with British, EU and American elections.

Elon Musk’s constant display of an affinity for Nazism is simply a case of the puppet serving his foreign master.

While Apple’s technology itself could be seen as innovative and privacy-preserving in a very narrow view, their implementation of a closed ecosystem has dangerous lock-in effects. A properly open, standards-based approach could deliver these benefits while preserving the fundamental user agency and platform choice required for actual safety. Having led the early design and delivery of encrypted virtual machines in 2010 and delivered industry-changing field level client-side encryption of NoSQL by 2019, I can say with confidence there are better fundamental paths ahead for AI safety than what is being offered by Apple.

Security and Privacy Checklist

Here’s a set of tests to expose systems designed with too much lock-in:

• Does it use open standards for homomorphic encryption in AI applications?
• Does it use interoperable protocols that allow encrypted data sharing across platforms?
• Does it have community-audited implementations?
• Does it use decentralized approaches where encrypted processing happens on edge devices?
• Does it use peer-to-peer networks for sharing encrypted embeddings?
• Are encryption keys and processing user-controlled?
• Are there clear user controls over data usage and sharing?
• Is there an ability to revoke access to historical data?
• Are there options for local-only processing?

Critical Analysis of Apple’s AI Encryption Strategy

I couldn’t help but notice how Apple frames their belief in privacy, without the really important part said out loud about barriers to exit.

At Apple, we believe privacy is a fundamental human right [that you lose if you jump ship].

In the late 1700s philosopher David Hume clearly warned that any vendor who gives the option to jump off a ship only in the middle of the ocean is not giving any real option.

Problem 1: Centralized Infrastructure Control

• While the data remains encrypted, Apple maintains complete control over the homomorphic encryption infrastructure
• Users are dependent on Apple’s proprietary implementation and cannot easily migrate to alternative systems
• The “networked” benefits are confined within Apple’s ecosystem

Problem 2: Encryption Implementation

• The security relies entirely on Apple’s proprietary implementation of homomorphic encryption
• There’s no way to independently audit or verify the encryption process
• Users must trust Apple’s claim that the data remains truly encrypted and private

Problem 3: Platform Lock-in Effects

• By creating a powerful network effect around encrypted data sharing, Apple strengthens its ecosystem lock-in
• The more users contribute encrypted data, the more valuable the system becomes, creating high switching costs
• Competitors would struggle to build comparable systems without similar scale

Problem 4: Data Sovereignty Issues

• Even though data is encrypted, users still lose direct control over how their data moves and is processed
• The evaluation function and global POI database are controlled entirely by Apple
• Users cannot opt out of specific data uses while maintaining platform benefits

Problem 5: Future Risks

• If Apple’s homomorphic encryption is ever compromised, it could expose historical user data
• Apple could potentially modify the system to reduce privacy protections in the future
• Users have no guarantee of long-term data portability

Lucky for Palo Alto residents, one of them who saw the spill called emergency responders.

The spill occurred at about 5 p.m. on Oct. 17, according to a hazardous spills report issued by the governor’s Office of Emergency Services. While the office could not say how much of the mixture was released and how much of it affected the creek, the Palo Alto Fire Department recovered 550 gallons of the mixture from the storm drain, the report stated.

This story has legs now because of shady business — Tesla doesn’t have permits required for the chemicals the city is now cleaning up.

While the incident occurred on Oct. 17, the city didn’t publicize it until this week, when community members began asking questions about the industrial activity around Matadero Creek, near Boulware Park. […] According to the city, the cleanup in this area concluded quickly but officials later saw damage east of the area, as the substance moved through the city’s storm drains. …according to the National Institutes of Health, sodium hydroxide is toxic by ingestion, corrosive to metals and tissue and may severely irritate skin, eyes and mucous membranes. […] According to the city, storage of sodium hydroxide requires a city permit, which the company had not obtained.

Lots of twists. The city says it was a quick cleanup of 550 gallons, but then Tesla says they only dumped 12 gallons, and meanwhile a week later the cleanup doesn’t seem to be over yet.

But let me speak to something especially odd about this story. If the liquid was indeed NaOH (sodium hydroxide), which the news correctly explains is highly corrosive to metal, then someone needs to audit the company’s safety practices.

A bright green color likely means a specialized liquid. The presence of sodium hydroxide suggests it could be an alkaline-based coolant, possibly with corrosion inhibitors and dye added for leak detection. Or there could be the presence of copper compounds from the cooling system’s metal components reacting with the alkaline solution.

While data centers typically use standard coolants like water with glycol or specialized dielectric fluids, Tesla may have been playing with a custom cooling solution to handle extreme heat generated by their AI chips. If this was indeed their approach, the choice raises serious questions about both the engineering decisions and safety protocols involved. This isn’t just a basic leak because Tesla actively using sodium hydroxide in a cooling system is baffling from an engineering perspective.

NaOH corrodes most metals, including aluminum and copper that are essential in cooling systems. Running corrosive coolant through metal pipes and heat exchangers under pressure is asking for trouble — it’s like filling your car’s radiator with drain cleaner and hoping it doesn’t catastrophically fail.

Even if they’d added corrosion inhibitors, the base chemical endangers both the infrastructure and the workers. The fact that no one caught this in safety reviews (and that Tesla lacked basic chemical storage permits) suggests their rush to build AI systems may be overriding fundamental engineering and safety practices.

The disaster is exacerbated by the delay in public notification, as people and pets could have been unknowingly exposed to contaminated water in Matadero Creek and around Boulware Park while Tesla and officials knew about the hazard. Even more concerning is whether Tesla has known for a long time, spilling before anyone was watching or reporting.