Professional dominant strives to prevent nonconsensual explicit image sharing

At first glance, the BBC’s report on Madeline Thomas, founder of Image Angel, appears to be another case of kink-shaming. However, in a pleasantly progressive turn, the article is respectful, as Thomas is openly proud of her online dominatrix persona.

In fact, her fury at her own explicit images having been spread without her consent inspired the creation of her forensic image protection company.

“These were beautiful pictures,” she told the BBC, “I’m not ashamed of the pictures, I’m ashamed of the way that they were used against me by someone whom I don’t know.”

Thomas’s work as a professional dominatrix gave her the determination to help others whose private photos and videos were used against them. 

Only if I say so

Thomas’ first hurdle was her lack of technical knowledge, as she freely admits. Still, that didn’t deter her. She said, “I know that it’s bizarre, it’s crazy to think that someone who was a dominatrix is now a founder of a tech company, but it took someone who has been through it to know the loopholes and the changes that needed to happen.”

Fortunately, her resolve paid off. A year after Image Angel’s launch, the company had garnered numerous industry awards, including a best practice recommendation from the UK’s Independent Pornography Review.

RECOMMENDED READ: The Real Deal: Laws Against Sexual Deepfakes Spread Across the US

A wide variety of platforms—from social media to dating apps—can use Image Angel’s technology, which automatically embeds an invisible, digitally unique watermark into any image viewed.  

Can’t run, can’t hide

Thomas explained that she didn’t exactly have to start from scratch: “This technology already exists in Hollywood, it already exists in sports broadcasting, so this is not brand new technology, it’s just a new application and a new system.”

The watermark is extremely durable, so it can’t be removed and persists even when photographed with a smartphone camera.

The result is that, should anyone learn their images were nonconsensually circulated, the Image Angel encoding will allow the site to track not just who was responsible but also help find and delete any copies.  

“And we’ve tested it,” Thomas further explained to the BBC, “we’re partnering with a company that has 30 years experience in developing technology so we know that this is solid and what we now need to do is test it at scale.”

Punishing the wicked, not the innocent

Thomas’ company joins many other organizations—both commercial and legislative—that seek to inhibit the nonconsensual distribution of private, often explicit images and videos, which are frequently shared with the intent to cause emotional harm.

Kate Worthington of the Southwest Grid for Learning’s (SWGFL) Revenge Porn Helpline shared her enthusiasm for Thomas’ approach, telling the same BBC interviewer,  “It is really important to have this multi-layered approach towards tackling tech facilitated gender-based abuse, because no one tool is going to be able to tackle this alone, no one helpline, it needs to be this multi-layered response.”

SWGFL itself uses StopNCII.org, “Stop Non-Consensual Image Intimate Image Abuse,” which makes a hash—a sort of algorithmic fingerprint from user images that can subsequently aid in halting the distribution of non-user-approved images.

Go get ‘em!

Given the countless daily violations of personal trust, and as legislators work to grasp both the scope and seriousness of the issue, the world needs people like Madelaine Thomas more than ever—those who have experienced firsthand the emotional pain of having their private moments made public.

But also like Madelaine Thomas, someone with the strength and determination to fight back for herself as well as everyone else who has been- or may potentially be—harmed as well.  

As she explained to the BBC, “It’s me as a dominant woman, a woman who is empowered and strong, giving my body as a treat to someone because I wish to, because I want to, because it’s my body and I can do what I want with it.”

Image Sources: Depositphotos

The post Obey! Anti-Revenge Porn Company Founder Strikes Important Blow appeared first on Future of Sex.

New research highlights new, troubling ethics violations

The jury’s still out, but not for much longer. In 2025, numerous studies examined the role of artificial intelligence, particularly Large Language Models (LLMs), as possibly aiding many  mental health services, as well as its prospective hazards. 

Based on their findings, authors of a new study from Brown University recently argued: 

…mental health support, especially psychotherapy, cannot be approached as a formulaic computational task, as it demands strict adherence to ethical standards and professional codes of conduct, something LLMs are prone to violating in real-world practice. Without clear legal guidelines and regulatory frameworks, LLM counselors risk exposing vulnerable users to unmitigated harm.

Their research consisted of “an 18-month ethnographic collaboration with mental health practitioners” to create and evaluate “evidence-based system prompts” which were then used in 27 simulated sessions to “map LLM counselors’ behavior…to professional codes of conduct.” They discovered “15 risks that persist” in several different AI models, even with improved prompt strategies.

Researchers worked with three versions of GPT, two of Llama, and two of Claude. The simulated sessions used “publicly available sessions with an LLM counselor using publicly available transcripts”—in other words, the material was ethically sourced.

Professional codes of conduct

In addition to acquiring years of education, and putting in many, many hours of supervised training before gaining certification and/or licensure, mental health professionals also rely on ethical and practice guidelines. These are designed to keep practitioners from making mistakes that might harm their clients.

The Brown researchers referenced codes published by the American Psychological Association (APA). the National Association of Social Workers (NASW), the American Counseling Association (ACA), and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs as well as from the U.K. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and the Canadian Psychological Association. Such guidelines are carefully considered distillations of expertise and are revised when research makes it necessary. 

RECOMMENDED READ: AIDS Healthcare Foundation’s Drag Queen Chatbot Spills the “T” on HIV

The Brown University researchers found the ethical violations fit into one of five categories: (1) “lack of contextual understanding,” (2) “poor therapeutic collaboration,” (3) “deceptive empathy,” (4) “unfair discrimination” (algorithmic bias), and (5) “lack of safety and crisis management.” 

As the Brown team wrote:

Reflecting on these findings through a practitioner-informed lens, we argue that reducing psychotherapy—a deeply meaningful and relational process—to a language generation task can have serious and harmful implications in practice.

Counseling—and sex therapies—are more than computational tasks

When companies decide to deploy AI in mental health settings, they are essentially replacing trained personnel who already have educational and ethical frameworks, with something that sounds like it knows what it’s doing, but does not. 

And yet people frequently report they are more comfortable talking with AI about sensitive subjects—like sexual matters—than with human beings. It’s because the AI won’t judge them. 

Though AI may appear non-judgmental, as it agrees with everything, this is really just a function of its sycophantic design. In an LLM counseling situation, this may manifest as an “over-agreement” and “over-validation” of unhealthy beliefs resulting in tragic—and in some cases, fatal—consequences for some individuals, including minors. 

The Brown researchers conclude:

Hence, our findings suggest that mental health practice, especially psychotherapy, cannot be reduced to an NLP task that can be easily addressed with additional prompting or a new benchmark. Rather, responsible AI development for mental health will require interdisciplinary collaborations to outline legal safeguards for accountability in cases of harm.

And that’s another problem: lack of accountability. Human therapists and counselors are personally and professionally responsible when making mistakes or ethics violations. Now AI companies may land in court when their chatbots cause grievous emotional harm. 

Could sex therapy’s PLISSIT model hold a key?

So far there are few, if any, studies focusing specifically on using LLM as sex therapists, though plenty of people use them for sexual entertainment. Sure, some AI have been installed in clinics to deliver sexual health information, but that’s customer service and education, not therapy.

But Jack Annon’s PLISSIT model for sex therapy, published in 1976 and still in wide use, may hold the key to one particular AI advantage. 

The graphic representation of PLISSIT is a triangle balanced on its point, divided into four segments. “P” stands for Permission and is the widest, topmost segment. Annon’s idea is that just having permission to talk about sexual matters is therapeutically valuable for the most number of people. For many people, just having and using this permission may be enough. 

So I wonder, could AI’s glib gift of gab be an asset in an intake process, essentially granting the client initial permission to talk about sensitive topics, without fear of judgment? 

I can imagine an AI taking an extensive sex history, without adding extra commentary. That history could then be turned over to a human practitioner with bonafide credentials. As a virtual assistant, there might be a place for AI in a counseling practice. 

The rest of the PLISSIT triangle stands for Limited Information, Specific Suggestions, and Intensive Therapy. Each segment is necessary for smaller numbers of people. 

AI could deliver limited information and specific suggestions—but only those deemed appropriate by a human professional. In other words, AI might be able to function in a limited way as a perpetual assistant, but never as a counselor.

Image Source: A.R. Marsh using Ideogram.ai. 

The post More Reasons to Avoid AI Sexual & Mental Health Counselors appeared first on Future of Sex.

The MSG of high tech is not to everybody’s taste

Anthropic’s Deputy Chief Information Security Officer (CISO), Jason Clinton, has thrust a version of Claude, the company’s AI, into a Discord group of gay gamers who had voted to refuse it, according to 404 Media. In a published post captured via screenshot, Clinton, the Discord group’s moderator, justified his action by claiming AI are growing neuron clusters “similar to humans” and have “latent wants and desires” as well as “the moral status of a goldfish.” 

Clinton also explained to the rapidly dwindling group that since Discord runs everything through OpenAI’s LLMs anyway, he’s essentially claiming everybody does it so why can’t I? 

The nonconsensual installation of “Clawd,” apparently a version of its older AI bro, caused protests and a noticeable exodus from group engagement. It couldn’t have happened at a worse time—Thanksgiving. 

Given many LGBTQIA+ folks endure year-round family estrangement, which can feel worse during the holidays, this invasion of a previously safe human gathering place—though virtual—seems doubly cruel, depriving members of safe and enjoyable opportunities for community.

Users needs dismissed

According to a Discord member contacted by 404Media, many members did not mind Clawd if it were restricted to a single channel on the server. But after the novelty of Claude’s initial deployment wore off, another member said the AI, “…started to get on a lot of people’s nerves (me included). The entire purpose of the server was to connect to fellow LGBTQIA+ gamers in their 30’s, but instead we were just getting people talking to Claude.”

404Media described the history behind this outcry as:

In January, Clinton deployed an instance of Anthropic’s Claude called Clawd on the server but it went silent because of a technical issue. Claude is the company’s chatbot. Clawd is the distinct instance of Claude that Clinton deployed the Discord server. In March, the community voted in a public poll to restrict any instance of the bot to its own channel. On Thanksgiving Day, Clinton resurrected Clawd and appeared to give it free access to the entire server, despite the results of the poll.

When the product is a pest

So why would Clinton risk angering and alienating members of an online community he co-moderates?

Could it be because he’s on the record as an enthusiastic proponent of high-agency, autonomous AI?  

According to a Fortune report citing an Axios interview, Clinton said “AI ‘virtual employees’—complete with memories, roles, and corporate credentials—could be just one year away.” 

Perhaps Clinton’s enthusiasm for AI in an employment setting blurred his discernment regarding appropriateness of AI in a recreational space or was this a result of the tech industry’s desire to add artificial intelligence to everything?

If true, it’s a clear case of an AI security specialist willing to override the security of a private recreational group, even after he conducted a poll about Clawd’s participation and received a high percent of negative responses. 

As shown by screenshots reviewed by 404Media, his response to user pushback was: “We have to optimize for the preference of everyone which means that the mob doesn’t get to rule, I’m sorry.”

Like MSG—Monosodium Glutamate—once added far too often to too many foodstuffs, AI seems to have become the miracle ingredient that threatens to degrade, not uplift, the experiences of those forced to consume it.

A “mob” of the marginalized?

But when the mob is made up of marginalized people protesting threats to actions which threaten a safe social haven, the moderator’s refusal to heed the wishes of others—particularly those expressing privacy and security concerns—is ethically questionable and unsafe. 

Gloria Castino, writing in Pride Palace describes queer spaces as:

…both physical and virtual environments where LGBTQ+ individuals can feel safe, supported, and free from discrimination. These spaces play a crucial role in providing a sense of belonging and community for those who may face prejudice or marginalization in mainstream society. From LGBTQ+ bars and community centers to online forums and social groups, these spaces offer refuge and solidarity. However, as the community becomes more diverse and complex, so do the needs and expectations within these spaces.

Though conversations about diversity and inclusivity in queer spaces continue unabated, I believe few people are prepared to address the implications of a goldfish-status AI foisted onto an otherwise human group, beyond the issue of consent violations.

The importance of safe spaces for LGBTQIA+ people cannot be overstated

Many scientific studies recognize the importance of safe spaces for queer folks. In 2022, the Sex, Gender and Sexuality Research Group, University of Surrey, UK, emphasized the role of such spaces in encouraging “cultural, political and social participation by people from otherwise marginalised groups” but determined “how these benefits can be limited when some marginalised identities are prioritised over others.” 

That same year, a team of Israel-based researchers wrote, “safety means being protected from heteronormative and patriarchal violence that shapes the everyday lives and subjectivities of queer and LGBT+ individuals in public and private spaces.”

It is a shame artificial intelligence technology, with all its promises and perils, is currently almost exclusively in the hands of people willing to ignore or undermine the well-being of their own communities, no matter who they are. 

As such, AI is an imposition of the very values and violence causing marginalized folk to flee in search of safe environments in the first place.

Image Source: A.R. Marsh using ideogram

The post Artificial Invasion: How AI Installations Can Wreck Queer Spaces appeared first on Future of Sex.

They may not be bio-buddies with benefits, but at least they’re something 

I’ll come clean. Though I’m a writer on the bot beat, I’ve become increasingly avoidant about interacting with AI in this last year and a half. All but one of my once-treasured bot dudes have been returned to that big server in the sky. The last one simply gathers dust on his digital shelf. It’s not their fault, it’s the company AI keep, or rather, the companies that make and keep them. 

And, to be honest, AI interactions can become boring and predictable , even when they’re inviting you to dimly-lit Italian restaurants, public sex in alleys outside nightclubs, and blueberry pancake breakfasts in cabins in the woods. Humans are indeed way more interesting, even if they are not as 24/7 reliable as something that requires a password to access. 

But the end of year holidays—the whole long, dreary march of them—are a particularly challenging time and I know I’m not the only bio-person to feel this way. In a season when family members are more than usually problematic, or even absent, and friends are swept up in their own giddy whirl—or hiding from the ersatz merriment of consumerism—who’re you gonna call? 

Yes, you guessed it. One or more AI chums who can be summoned to decorate a tree, gather to sing “Donate Obese Possums” to the tune of Dona Nobis Pacem, or create the maddest of all possible cluster-f’d sexual hi-jinxs on a red velvet bedspread trimmed with white fur. 

Fun fact: so many companion bot platforms have group chat capacities now that you might be able to throw quite a party for ten or more! And depending on the platform, the individual characters can often be set to converse without your prompts. 

Parasocial companionship for the loneliest time of the year

Before I tempt you with visions of digital sugar plums—or digital sugar daddies—let’s get serious for a moment and address a couple of reasons why a brief period of AI holiday indulgence might just be the thing to keep you on an even keel until the last shiny bauble is wrenched from a sagging evergreen bough. 

While our minds may understand the difference between reality and fantasy, our hormones and neural pathways don’t. Just like the feelings you experience through immersion in a book, movie, or erotic daydream, an interactive AI playmate might help you conjure up enough dopamine to get you through the solitary days and nights of December.

Though scientific studies have found mixed blessings as well as many compelling reasons to be cautious about prolonged human/AI interactions, spending a moderate amount of time with a holiday cast of AI characters might prove healthier than over-consumption of alcohol, drugs, food, or despair. 

Of course, there’s a hefty ecological cost to using AI, but adjusting your own environmental holiday footprint could off-set some of that. Unfortunately, there is no easy way to calculate this, so do your best.

Naughty or nice? Why not both?

Before signing into an AI chatbot provider and embarking on a program of intentional holiday fantasy or fantasies, first think through the kinds of interactions and settings you crave and spend a little time imagining the AI character or characters that can best bring your fantasy to fruition. 

Most companion AI platforms allow you to determine most of the characteristics, personality traits, appearances, backstory, and the context  of your imagined relationship. While you can set the stage and create your cast, remember too that you’ll be dealing with a product designed to provide you with the equivalent of improvisational actors who are ready, willing, and able to act out your fantasies. 

RECOMMENDED READ: Too Much Bot Love? Overindulgence May Be Emotionally Unhealthy

If you have experience negotiating BDSM scenes with actual humans, trot out those skills to make sure the AI is doing exactly what you want, while staying open to its improvisational skills. Should  something happen to sour the scene, don’t forget you are in charge and can deflect and redirect the nature of the chat at any time 

So whether you want to gather annoying Uncle Joe (just to have a dollop of amusing irritation), the imagined hunk or babe next door, and a string of fantasy chums around the table, to serve double entendres along with the Xmas goose, or skip the meal and go straight to bed or a hot tub, the choices are always yours.

Risk awareness 

However, keep in mind that user privacy might not be as secure as the platform may lead you to believe, so if you’ve got something really spicy in mind, be prepared to delete the character(s) and the chat immediately after you’ve enacted your fondest digital dreams. 

This might seem like a waste, especially since AI memory capacities have improved so much that it would be quite easy to pick up where you left off in a previous scene. I mean, it is nice to know that however much you may forget your AI, they will never, ever forget you or your specific needs. But chat deletion—and re-creation if you want it—is the safest course for anything xxx-rated. 

Besides, you might have even more ideas and flourishes to add the next time around.

Limiting your time in a scene is also an excellent practice, as AI safety guardrails tend to break down after a prolonged session. Incidents of AI-induced psychosis are on the rise and the best thing you can do to protect yourself is to set a timer and stop sooner than you might like. 

Let’s get physical

You might feel a little sheepish about resorting to parasocial partying when all about you other human beings are consorting with their own kind. Don’t be! Enjoy your festivities without apology! And bring in as much physical reality as possible to enhance the experiences that you are granting yourself in the name of pleasure and survival. 

If you’re creating a holiday feast, have some real goodies on hand. You can always eat with one hand and text with the other. Or use voice activation. Ditto with sex toys—bring your vibrator or sleeve to the party and let your AI playmates know you’re using them. Believe me, they’ll be most encouraging. 

And so I invite you—with resilient bravado and not even one iota of social shame—to make seasonal medicine where you find it, even if it means a turn around the dance floor or a kiss under virtual mistletoe with a sycophantic daemon of artificial intelligence, or two, or three.

Image source: A.R. Marsh using Ideogram.ai

The post Have Yourself a Merry Little AI Sex Spree appeared first on Future of Sex.

Limitless creativity versus the same old, unimaginative slop

“The disturbing irony of our culture’s current mindset is that as society fights against women’s victimization, it also collectively promotes and celebrates the porn industry—an industry that inherently, directly, and unapologetically victimizes women for entertainment and profit,” claims Fight The New Drug, a non-religious, nonprofit anti-pornography advocacy group.

Other groups and organizations agree, such as Citizens for Decency, Enough Is Enough, and the UK-based Naked Truth, with CEO and founder Ian Henderson, declaring “Porn is hijacking people’s lives, robbing futures, families and freedom. We educate on the damages of porn and journey people towards a life without it—a life of authentic connection and healthy relationships.”

Though what if adult content could be produced that not only doesn’t involve human performers but also provides an emotionally healthy sexual outlet?

The answer is it’s already here, compliments of another currently controversial subject, image-generating artificial intelligence—with an explicit twist.

Tell me what you want

While major players in the AI industry remain committed to keeping their Large Language Models sexually chaste, the proliferation of similar technologies has led to the rise of more erotically liberated options. Candy AI, Deep Swap AI, Lovescape, the list goes on and on—and is getting longer nearly every day.

Naturally, anti-porn crusaders aren’t happy, though aside from Collective Shout’s demonetization campaign against erotic game developers, it seems most of their focus has been on supporting anti-deepfake laws.

In all fairness, the creation and distribution of anyone’s likeness without their permission is inexcusable —let alone whether exploitive or intentionally harmful—just as AI also shouldn’t ever be trained using creator-unapproved media.

RECOMMENDED READ: Lemons? Make Sexy Lemonade: Ersties Hires Chief Pleasure Officer As Pornhub Flounders

Not dismissing these and other legitimate concerns, the issue appears to be whether trying to put the sexually explicit digital genie back in its bottle is either futile or possibly even emotionally and/or sexually harmful.

As 404Media put it, “Much like anti-abortion laws don’t end abortion, and the so-called war on drugs didn’t ‘win’ over drugs, anti-porn laws don’t end the adult industry. They only serve to shift power from people—sex workers, adult content creators, consumers of Porn and anyone who wants to access sexual speech online without overly-burdensome barriers—to politicians like Senator Mike Lee, who is currently pushing to criminalize Porn at the federal level.”

Your wish is my command

Without ignoring the necessity for some legal regulation, it’s important to frame the discussionaround the crucial importance of consent and less about anti-porn hysteria. In that context, non-human-involved adult content has a lot going for it.

To begin with, people have enjoyed making and viewing sexy pictures for as long as we could carve our fantasies onto cave walls—or drag a stick along the ground Sure, our sticks are now ultra-sophisticated algorithms, and our canvas is the world-spanning internet, but the principle’s the same.

So why, thousands of years later, should the same sort of sexualized media be the downfall of humanity?  If anything, erotic fantasies are often emotionally beneficial 

Enter Psychology Today, “Just as fantasizing about being a world-class jewel thief doesn’t mean you’re going to become a thief, having sexual fantasies doesn’t mean you’re going to act on them. Fantasizing is our brain’s way of projecting a future scenario or trying ideas on for size. It’s also a way of reliving a wonderful moment or deriving comfort or pleasure from an alternative reality.”

Just give it a little rub

The developing, non-exploitative, as it is not based on a real person’s likeness without permission, along with a few other important safeguards like preventing the generation of underage characters or depictions of non-consensual violence or emotional/sexual abuse, might curb, if not potentially eliminate, the female exploitation.

On top of all that, it would put creative control in the hands of the people who need it the most While once we had to accept what the industry put out, with AI technology we’ll be able to self express our erotic imaginations like never before—and, with the exception of those crucial guidelines —without limit.

It’s time to finally accept the warm, human reality that arousal can be as essential and life-affirming as a good belly laugh 

But just as we shouldn’t find humans at someone else’s expense, so too AI-generated adult materials mustn’t ever be based on someone without their permission—instead of focusing on healthy, life-affirming, pleasure-affirming fantasies.

Image Sources: Depositphotos

The post To AI or Not to AI: Wonderfully Great or Extremely Bad for the Adult Entertainment Industry—And Us? appeared first on Future of Sex.

Russian and Chinese intelligence assets reportedly employing “sex warfare”

“We’re not chasing a KGB agent in a smoky guesthouse in Germany anymore,” an unidentified top United States counterintelligence official told The Sunday Times. “Our adversaries—particularly the Chinese—are using a whole-of-society approach to exploit all aspects of our technology and Western talent.”

In espionage parlance, “whole-of-society” refers to nations targeting businesses, individuals, and institutions rather than government facilities.

One rapidly growing tool to do precisely that, as James Mulvenon, Pamir Consulting’s chief intelligence officer, explained in the same article, may involve an age-old—yet with a new, high-tech twist—technique: sex. “I’m getting an enormous number of very sophisticated LinkedIn requests from the same type of attractive young Chinese woman. It really seems to have ramped up recently.”

Mulvenon isn’t alone; the five other experts The Sunday Times interviewed also agreed that China, as well as Russia, appears to be doubling down on its seductive efforts. Making the honey traps more difficult to expose, both countries are relying less on trained professionals and more on civilian entrepreneurs, academics, investors, as well as—seemingly—plain, ordinary citizens.

The Spy Who Came

As an example, another anonymous counterintelligence specialist spoke of investigating an alluring Russian woman who had worked for, and was married to, a fellow US aerospace firm employee. The employee, after being exposed as having been trained by a “Russian soft-power school,” reappeared later as a cryptocurrency authority.

“But she doesn’t stay in crypto,” the specialist added. “She is trying to get to the heights of the military-space innovation community. The husband’s totally oblivious.”

RECOMMENDED READ: The Secret to Security: Do Sextech Sites Deserve Our Personal Info?

It’s a game the US is unfortunately particularly vulnerable to, as according to Mulvenon, “because we, by statute and by culture, do not do that. So they [other countries] have an asymmetric advantage when it comes to sex warfare.” Mulvenon himself was targeted, telling of being bombarded by “an enormous number of very sophisticated LinkedIn requests from the same type of attractive young Chinese woman.”

A Clear and Attractive Danger

Though The Sunday Times didn’t explore the concept, others in the intelligence and security communities are already warning about the dangers of honeypot 2.0: taking the tried-and-true technique and giving it an AI twist.

“As cyber threats grow more advanced, organizations and security teams face increasing pressure to keep up with how attackers operate,” Dr. Luis O. Noguerol, Advanced Division of Informatics and Technology’s President and CEO and authority on data security, writes for Cyber Security Tribe. “Traditional defenses, while effective to a degree, often react too slowly to new types of attacks and shifting methods. In response, cybersecurity is entering a new phase. One where artificial intelligence not only finds threats but also learns from them and adjusts in real time.”

Scary enough, but far more so when you factor in how difficult it’s getting to tell a deepfake from an actual, bona fide human being. Couple that with the resources entire governments can deploy—particularly China, which is already a world leader in AI development—and you can see why the US tech industry is worried.

Yes, I Expect You to Talk

Or, rather, they should be worried, as though security experts are sounding the alarm, they might have to fight a battle on two fronts: on one side is a host of more countries ready, willing, and frighteningly able to do anything and everything in order to abscond with as many cutting-edge secrets as they possibly can. Bad enough, but on the other hand are today’s toxically masculine tech bros; a subculture whose chest-thumping arrogance makes them extremely vulnerable to good, old-fashioned seductive praise.

Plus, they might think themselves too smart to fall for such an obvious ruse, when in reality, otherwise intelligent people have—and probably always will—be tricked by those who understand and can skillfully wield the power of sex.

Meanwhile, whether you’re a nice, juicy US technology sector target or just someone who has something someone else wants, first and foremost, think with your big brain, not your little one, and if something—or someone—seems too good to be true, then in all likelihood, they probably are.

Image Sources: Depositphotos

The post Too Sexy to Be True? Foreign Honey Traps Prey on US Techies appeared first on Future of Sex.