X thread takes aim at New York Post over anonymous sources and claims of rigged AI regulation

An account called Chubby on X published a thread attacking a New York Post story. The post alleges the paper cites unnamed "cyber experts" and "internal sources" who claim OpenAI and Anthropic inflated security incidents caused by weak safeguards in order to push regulation that would shut out rivals.

The thread's main target is the quality of the Post's sourcing. Chubby notes the article leans on two anonymous people from companies no one has heard of, labeled "internal sources" in scare quotes, and argues that isn't journalism — it's on par with any random shitposting account on the platform.

The claim surfacing from the post, whether it originates with the Post or Chubby's reading of it, points to a familiar regulatory-capture pattern: dominant firms weaponizing safety fears to advance rules that raise barriers for new entrants. OpenAI and Anthropic are the two companies named; both lead the large-language-model field.

Chubby sums up with "it's getting more confusing by the day," reflecting the difficulty of separating factual reporting, PR spin, and legitimate criticism in the AI safety debate. When anonymous sources from unknown outfits are presented as proof that tech giants are manipulating the narrative, readers have no way to assess credibility.

The thread does not specify which security incidents are involved, when they occurred, or which regulations are allegedly being pushed. The identities of the "cyber experts" are also withheld. Without those details, the claim remains an allegation about an allegation — another layer of noise in a conversation already thick with opaque interests.