New York (AFP) – Several figures in artificial intelligence (AI) have recently been the target of violent acts, an impulse born of existential anxieties and a hatred of the powerful, from which critics of the sector dissociate themselves.

Published on: 04/29/2026 - 12:19

A molotov cocktail thrown against the gate of the house of OpenAI boss Sam Altman. A volley of 13 bullets fired at the door of Ron Gibson, local elected official in Indianapolis and supporter of a data center construction project.

These attacks took place over a period of several days during which two individuals also fired shots outside the residence of the same Sam Altman, without it being established whether he was targeted.

In a manifesto, the owner of the incendiary device expressed the risk of “imminent extinction” that AI posed to the human species, and urged Sam Altman to “redeem” himself if he survived the attack.

“Anxiety linked to new technologies is not something new,” recalls Nirit Weiss-Blatt, author of a book on the growing hostility towards tech, “even if this seems more extreme.”

She highlights the gap between the issues raised by AI skeptics, from job cuts to environmental effects, and "the doomsday bubble" in which the suspect, Daniel Moreno-Gama, operated.

This sphere is fueled by writings such as the book "If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies: Why Superhuman AI Would Kill Us All" by researchers Eliezer Yudkowsky and Nate Soares.

The various suspects have no proven links between them and do not claim to be part of an organization. But Mauro Lubrano, professor at the University of Bath (UK) and author of a book on anti-tech extremism, refutes the "lone wolf" classification, because they "are part of a common digital ecosystem".

He draws a parallel with the damage to Tesla vehicles and dealerships in 2025, committed without coordination in North America and Europe against a backdrop of radicalization by Elon Musk.

The big figures in AI take the danger very seriously. “In recent months, we have clearly seen an increase” in demand for physical protection among technology companies, reports Rory Moran, head of executive security at specialist company USI.

“Big technology and AI companies are in the news all the time,” he emphasizes. In this context, “we are observing an increase in attempts to attack”.

The Mangione effect

Added to this is a renewal of animosity towards the bosses, a current resurrected by the murder of the general director of the health insurer UnitedHealthcare, Brian Thompson, in December 2024 in New York.

Luigi Mangione, suspected of being the shooter, has been established by a significant number of Americans, especially young people, as a popular antihero, a sort of romantic vigilante denouncing the excesses of capitalism.

After the gesture against Sam Altman, dozens of Internet users posted the same image of Luigi Mangione as a haloed saint.

On TikTok, many people minimized the attack, justified it or attributed responsibility for it to AI entrepreneurs and their speech, which was considered anxiety-provoking and uninhibited.

Organizations fighting against unlimited AI fear being associated with this violence that they denounce.

“The rhetoric of members of the movement for a pause or a stop (of AI) is out of control and it is getting worse,” wrote Dean Ball, former advisor to Donald Trump on AI, on X, referring to the best-known associations, PauseAI and Stop AI. “This speech has always had the potential to incite violence and it appears that it is no longer just theoretical.”

Before his action, Daniel Moreno-Gama went to the Stop AI Discord account to ask if he could talk about violence, says co-manager Valerie Sizemore. The moderators explained to him that this would result in a ban, and he never came back.

“Violence will not solve anything”, urges the one who pleads for “non-violent actions allowing people to be heard, demonstrations or artistic creations”.

Pause AI campaigns for a moratorium on the development of AI and international regulatory agreements, while Stop AI wants to raise awareness among legislators and promotes the creation of citizen supervision committees.

“My hope,” says Valerie Sizemore, “is that this moment brings a time of necessary listening and discussion.”

© 2026 AFP

The content you are trying to access does not exist or is no longer available.