The Future of Control: Who Guards Your Data and Life in the Age of Powerful AI?

20 Sep, 2025
| Salome K

The Future. Who controls the information?

The future when a person can control their information

The future is not only what we can create or build.

It is about whether we are ready to effectively control it?

This happened in China.

A robot hung limply on a crane.

And suddenly it came to life.

Smashed the monitor and attacked a person.

12M people watched the footage.

They called it the first robot uprising.

Nevertheless, this same model was sold to the general public.

Footage chilling the soul:

At a factory in China, a humanoid robot hangs motionless on a crane, and two workers are talking nearby.

And suddenly it comes to life.

Its limbs lash out furiously. A computer monitor flies to the side.

And the men who were standing next to the robot?

They run, saving their lives.

The robot turned out to be a Unitree H1 — a humanoid 6 feet (183 cm) tall with powerful motors and artificial intelligence.

It weighs 104 pounds (41 kg) and possesses enormous human strength.

And it was not a prototype, it has already appeared on the mass market.

And what is even more alarming.

It was sold to ordinary consumers… for $90,000.

But this machine was powerful enough to seriously injure or kill a person if something went wrong.

This is a huge safety risk.

What makes it so dangerous?

The Unitree H1 includes:

A frame made of metal or carbon fiber

Electric motors powering every joint

Cameras and sensors for vision

Artificial intelligence-based software that controls movement, walking, and balance.

But the moment the software fails or a malfunction of the robot occurs, it is like endowing a child with superhuman strength.

That crane it was hanging on? This is a common scheme during robot testing.

Developers use suspension setups so robots “learn” to walk without falling.

But this time… it was not just learning.

Everything turned into chaos — arms were flailing, equipment was being dragged, objects were breaking.

What if it hadn’t been limited in movement by ropes?

And this was not an isolated case.

In February 2025, another Unitree humanoid, dressed in a bright outfit, was performing at a public festival in Tianjin.

In the middle of the performance, it rushed at the crowd.

The audience screamed. Security rushed to attack.

Fortunately, no one was injured.

But this is already the second case — and not only in China.

At the Tesla Gigafactory in Austin, a robot attacked a human engineer.

It didn’t just malfunction. It pinned the man to the ground and dug into his back and arm, leaving him bleeding on the floor.

The robot continued to move. Continued to press.

The man left a bloody trail behind him until help arrived.

It was terrible. And it was real.

So what is wrong?

Probably:

– Software errors

– Sensor errors

– Misinterpreted commands

– Poor safety logic.

– Or the worst thing is external influence by hackers on the robot, with which they took control of it. The actions of Tesla’s competitors cannot be ruled out.

But here is a deeper truth:

Civilization has endowed powerful mobile machines with the ability to make real decisions without making sure they fully understand what they are doing.

In the case of AI-based chatbots, any error is irritating.

With humanoid robots? It is potentially deadly. No less dangerous are drones that are autonomously controlled by artificial intelligence, as well as corresponding IoT, of which there will be about 50 billion in the near future!

When AI controls a machine with moving joints, strong limbs, and a lack of emotional susceptibility, there are no harmless errors.

You get accidents, injuries, and panic.

What is the scariest thing?

Such technologies are already in people’s homes.

Anyone can buy one of these robots, take it out of the box, and let it roam around the neighborhood. Or launch an AI-autonomously controlled drone.

There is no regulatory oversight. No mandatory safety checks.

Nothing prevents this robot or drone from turning a failure into a tragedy.

So how do we stop it?

Here is what should already be done:

Physical limitations during all tests.

Emergency switches.

Movement restrictions in the software.

Real-time system monitoring.

Compliance with world safety standards (e.g., ISO 10218 and TEMPEST).

Currently, some companies bypass these issues or save on information security, as is the case with email, messengers, social networks.

This is unacceptable.

What is the point?

We are no longer just writing code.

We are creating moving machines with autonomous control using AI — machines that share physical space with people.

And this changes everything.

Because when these systems fail, it is no longer a “technical glitch.”

It is a human security crisis.

So no, it was not a robot uprising, but a warning.

Robots already exist.

They are strong, independent, and prone to errors.

We are completely unprepared for what will happen if something goes wrong.

The future is not only what we can build.

It is about what we are ready to control.

S. Putin signed a law on the creation of a national messenger. https://www.interfax.ru/amp/1032913

The adoption of the law will allow the creation of a new national multifunctional service on the territory of the Russian Federation, said earlier the head of the State Duma Committee on Information Policy, Sergey Boyarsky, presenting the document to the deputies.

According to him, “it will be more than a national messenger, it will have many interesting and unique functions.”

“A trusted and secure environment for communication, messaging, phone calls, and simultaneously receiving government and commercial services will be created,” the head of the committee noted.

For example, “with this app, it will be possible to confirm your age at a supermarket checkout or even check into a hotel without presenting paper documents,” added Boyarsky.

The first deputy chairman of the committee on information policy, Anton Gorelkin, explained that a unified state platform is being created that will unite business, the state, and users. According to him, “the closest analogy, but not completely coinciding with our vision, is We Chat,” a mobile Chinese communication system for transmitting text and voice messages.

In fact, the new information system is replacing the passport. This means that operations for the sale of apartments, real estate, and enterprises can also be carried out.

It is known that China, unlike Russia, produces its own mobile phones, computers, servers, chips, and operating systems for them.

Can government agencies effectively control a newly created information system operating on foreign information means? Definitely not!

Let me remind you that as a result of the scam with financial payment orders of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation (fake avizo), many trillions of rubles were stolen and the country was brought to the brink of destruction ( https://lenta.ru/articles/2023/04/07/avizoo/amp/). And only the unique hardware encryptors from my company Ankort, which were supplied to the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, stopped the criminals! Not software tools, but super reliable hardware encryptors created for processing secret and higher information.

Can the planned new messenger provide such a level of information security? Of course not. This is software functioning in an unprotected environment. Let me remind you that last year “phone scammers” stole over 500,000,000,000 rubles from Russians. And what can happen when this new and poorly protected messenger replaces a real passport? Scammers will be able to buy apartments, companies without the knowledge of the owners?

It is known that scammers take out loans, microloans for people who know nothing about it, having taken possession of their personal data: passport, SNILS, place of registration of residence… Many people had to block the issuance of loans from banks through government services. Will this new messenger also have to be blocked through government services so that criminals cannot acquire someone else’s apartment without the owner’s knowledge? If we cannot effectively control new information systems, then we should not endow them with legal functions, including the transfer of material and intellectual rights.