Kaspersky Warns of Emerging Cognitive AI Risks to Privacy and Autonomy

The article explicitly involves AI systems, particularly cognitive AI and large language models, in the context of potential harms such as phishing, manipulation of public opinion, digital abuse, and security risks from brain-computer interfaces. However, it does not describe any concrete event where these AI systems have directly or indirectly caused harm. The harms discussed are prospective and framed as emerging risks that could plausibly lead to incidents in the future. The main focus is on raising awareness, outlining risks, and emphasizing the need for regulation and preparedness. Therefore, the article fits the definition of Complementary Information, as it provides contextual and forward-looking insights without reporting a specific AI Incident or AI Hazard.

The article explicitly references AI systems and their evolving capabilities, such as large language models used in phishing and cognitive manipulation, as well as brain-computer interfaces. However, it does not describe any actual harm or incident caused by these systems but rather outlines potential risks and future threats. Therefore, it fits the definition of an AI Hazard, as it highlights plausible future harms stemming from AI development and use without reporting a realized incident.

The article explicitly involves AI systems, particularly cognitive AI and large language models, in the context of their development and use. It does not report any realized harm but warns about credible future risks such as sophisticated phishing attacks, mass manipulation, digital abuse, and cyberattacks on brain-computer interfaces. These risks align with plausible future harms to individuals' mental privacy, autonomy, and security, as well as societal trust and safety. Since the harms are potential and not yet realized, the classification as an AI Hazard is appropriate.

The article explicitly involves AI systems, particularly cognitive AI and large language models, and discusses their development and potential misuse. However, it does not report any concrete incident where AI has directly or indirectly caused harm. Instead, it outlines plausible future harms and emerging risks associated with these AI capabilities. Therefore, the event fits the definition of an AI Hazard, as it plausibly could lead to AI Incidents in the future but does not describe a current or past incident causing harm.

The article explicitly mentions AI systems (e.g., large language models, cognitive AI, BCIs) and their potential to cause harm through misuse or malicious use, such as phishing, manipulation, and cyberattacks on BCIs. However, it does not report any realized harm or specific events where these harms have occurred. Instead, it highlights plausible future risks and calls for preparedness and regulatory responses. This fits the definition of an AI Hazard, as the development and use of these AI systems could plausibly lead to incidents of harm in the future, but no direct or indirect harm has yet materialized according to the article.