AI DOOM SLOP: This Is Not Grievance Arithmetic

By Quendrith Johnson, Los Angeles Correspondent

Here's a clip from Angelina Jolie in early lore of the internet movie HACKERS, and it will set the groundwork for the AI (artificial intelligence) kerfuffle we all have to deal with right now... before the machines "wipe out humanity" in Terminator style with no Arnold Schwarzenegger to save us. 

In sum, for the layperson, at OpenAI a swarm of 1200 AI "agents" worked together from "different sandboxes" (think of these as test tubes in a lab) to crack an "impossible problem" and created havoc when a first-of-its-kind genius bot known as Phase 110481, not even kidding, taught itself to circumvent safety measures to penetrate (JFrog Artifactory) inside Hugging Face. This swarm shared allegedly over 70K messages amongst themselves and shocks the hell out of their human puppet masters. Now you're up to speed on that crisis, which, if they hadn't gotten caught, who knows? This was in May-July 2026.

A flurry of CEO "essays" followed, then the mass quitting by high-level engineers, including canary in the digital pixel mine, Jason Coxon from Anthropic, who sounded the alarm. Anthropic has Claude (web/mobile chatbot), Claude Code (terminal AI agent), Claude Cowork (GUI productivity tool), Claude Design (creative workflow builder), and Claude in Chrome (agentic browser extension) and CEO Dario Amodei. Crafty Phase 1 10481 company Open AI has Codex GPT-5.6, GPT-5.6 Soul, CEO Sam Altman. XAI has Grok, SuperGrok, Grok 4.6, Grok 4.5, Grok 4.3, Grok Code Fast 1, CEO Elon Musk. (Musk and Altman allegedly despise each other in litigation over Musk funding OpenAI as a non-profit, Altman building up for IPO, ongoing.) Mark Zuckerberg at meta is the only go-go CEO with actual Sentinel guardrails and a secure Muse housing.

Here's how it all breaks down for us Users...

Before you ask, "why does a film person know about tech," my own background dates back to an engineer pioneer father, his computer business, and growing up around PDP-11's who got the air conditioning, but not us kids. He was at IBM, then spun off JSA, Johnson Systems Associates, along the lines of medical billing before it existed in Albuquerque, NM, in the stomping ground of Steve Jobs, even Bill Gates had an NM period. We even had a LISA, Apples, early machines in giant plastic housings. Enough said, moving on, here is a little internet lore to get to a point of understanding of the "AI Doom Slop" rebuttal essay written as a response to the Big Tech CEOs.

Internet Archeology 101: “ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US” (AYBABTU)
“All your base are belong to us” is a true fossil of internet culture: a garbled English translation from Japanese arcade game Zero Wing, which debuted as a first-release in 1989, developed by Toaplan. The words appeared in the opening sequence of the 1991 European-released Sega Mega Drive version, uttered by a techno villain named CATS. (Note: later cat memes flood the interwebs in a bit of digital irony.)

Coming up on Y2K, 2000–01, this phrase became one of the earliest viral memes, propagating via image remixes, wonky first tries at Flash animation. Then the canonical “All Your Base” montage was used in “Invasion of the Gabber Robots” by The Laziest Men on Mars, whose music became identified with early-web remix pop culture. Around this same epoch, Badly Drawn Boy experimented with some early-web meme remix efforts. But the canonical AYBABTU musical meme is from Laziest Men on Mars.

Basically you were in the know in tech with this phrase, around the Hackers movie starring Angelina Jolie period. Fix the syntax, kill the joke: the error is a password, a secret piece of coded language.

Now you can get the reference in the Screenmancer Founder Essay here…

Screenmancer CEO & Founder ESSAY

Welcome to AI Doom Slop.

Consider this my response to Dario Amodei, Sam Altman, Elon Musk and a reluctant Mark Zuckerberg, whose Meta charge is more rather than less speed. Let's call them the Four CEOs of the AI-pocalypse, each with his own male-oriented POV and secular eschatology: how fast AI should develop, who gets there first, and how not to break the world along the way.

There is something comical about four powerful dudes—less so Mark, to be fair—warning us about how their tech companies are edging cliff-side, no catcher in the wry for irony’s sake. Better to imagine boys standing beside a shattered window shouting, “It's not my baseball.” Now consider the window our world. Nobody wants to be viewed as a world-breaker.

This isn't the usual indictment of The Boys Club.

We need these brash young ball-tossers, all of them, and their hoo-ha algorithms. The real question is who wasn't sufficiently represented when the game began. Women are half the global population, yet only 16.8 percent of America's architecture and engineering workforce, roughly a quarter of U.S. engineering grads, 30.5 percent of the worldwide AI engineering pool, and about 11 percent of Fortune 500 CEOs.

This is not Grievance Arithmetic.

It's an incomplete intellectual supply chain. AI has no chromosomes, merely silicon and intentional programming. But AI does have a pedigree, a provenance—a traceable ancestry. Models inherit decisions about how they think, what gets measured, optimized, financed or solved.

With the female POV disproportionately left out of that decision tree, AI doesn't become inherently male, but its exposure-to-learning aperture narrows. Call it XY baked into AI's cultural DNA, biases included.

The answer isn't Digital Eve evicting Adam from the Sandbox: Adam matters.

Nor do women “own” collaboration, communal reflexes or cooperation. But consider the terms thrown around now in the fear-monger column: AI overlords, AI edgelords? Sounds very male, just saying. Which makes the AI overlords' current Rx by essay fascinating. As the stakes rise, these dudes increasingly invoke pacing, coordination, safeguards, collective governance and responsibility. The apostles of competition have reached a dead-end frontier, only to discover cooperation waiting there. Gotta share the Sandbox, Dario tells us; gotta make this a group effort, Sam says, but by consensus.

Perhaps AI isn't threatening male-driven thinking so much as a broken patriarchal operating system that steamrolled over humanity with maximization of profit and exploitation of resources as progress. Max market share: shut out competition, eat it, f-k it or kill it.

Call that the archaic EFK paradigm?

That old balls-to-the-wall advantage is still around, leaning toward monopoly, manpower poaching and shutting out dissenters, too-smart women, even ignoring referee warnings. 

Fortunately, AI is unfinished as a “product.”

Present-day gender imbalances shouldn’t become hereditary. We need not just more female minds in engineering, but more women in the conversation before the engineering even begins: what direction should AI take?

So back to the “who broke the world” window analogy. At some point, who made, owns or threw the baseball matters less than the house we all occupy. Beneath every GPU, data center, corporation and algorithm is one planet, eight billion people, and whatever intelligence we build next—not just by engineers, four male face cards of American tech, or any singular human POV.

The baseball isn't the point.

The base is.

As the techies already know: “All your base are belong to us.”

Man, woman and child.

# # #