/
Navigation
Chronicles
Browse all articles
Explore
Semantic exploration
Research
Entity momentum
Nexus
Correlations & relationships
Story Arc
Topic evolution
Drift Map
Semantic trajectory animation
Posts
Analysis & commentary
Pulse API
Tech news intelligence API
Browse
Entities
Companies, people, products, technologies
Domains
Browse by publication source
Handles
Browse by social media handle
Detection
Concept Search
Semantic similarity search
High Impact Stories
Top coverage by position
Sentiment Analysis
Positive/negative coverage
Anomaly Detection
Unusual coverage patterns
Analysis
Rivalry Report
Compare two entities head-to-head
Semantic Pivots
Narrative discontinuities
Crisis Response
Event recovery patterns
Connected
Search: /
Command: ⌘K
Embeddings: large
TEXXR

Chronicles

The story behind the story

days · browse · Enter similar · o open

An interview with Jürgen Schmidhuber, whose neural network work in the 1990s went on to be used in Google Translate and Siri, on why many AI fears are misplaced

Jürgen Schmidhuber believes AI will progress to the point where it surpasses human intelligence and will pay no attention to people

The Guardian Josh Taylor

Context & Ripple Effects

Jürgen Schmidhuber has spent decades on this argument from both sides: the 1990s neural network research that ended up inside Google's neural-network rebuild of Translate and Siri made him one of the field's founding figures, while his Swiss AGI startup Nnaisense — covered in an earlier profile of him as a controversial pioneer — puts him among those actively trying to build superintelligence rather than merely predict it.

His claim that surpassing-human AI would simply pay people no attention lands mid-2023, at the peak of the existential-risk debate, where Meta's Yann LeCun has already staked out the same ground, calling experts' humanity-threatening scenarios "preposterously ridiculous" and warning that locking research away would be a mistake.

First-order effects

  • Schmidhuber becomes a second founding-generation voice — alongside LeCun's string of interviews dismissing danger hype — legitimizing the position that superintelligence is plausible but existential alarm is not.
  • Because his own work shipped in Google Translate and Siri, his skepticism carries product-level credibility that pure theorists lack, giving journalists and policymakers a counterweight to safety-focused testimony.

Second-order effects

  • Labs and researchers arguing against precautionary regulation gain an citable authority: with Schmidhuber and LeCun aligned, the 'keep research open' camp now spans two of the most decorated careers in deep learning.
  • The disagreement sharpens into a public fault line within the AI elite itself, forcing every lab leader and government advisor to pick a side between open-acceleration and containment framings.

Third-order effects

  • If the pattern holds, the decisive fight over AI policy will be argued between eminent insiders rather than imposed from outside, with governments calibrating regulation around which camp's framing wins the credibility contest — an outcome the corpus leaves genuinely unresolved.
  • Schmidhuber's later move into a national AI leadership role points toward sovereign states recruiting exactly these pioneer voices, embedding the open-research worldview inside state-funded AI programs.

The trend: The most senior figures who actually built modern deep learning are consolidating into a public vanguard against AI doom narratives, even as they assert superintelligence itself is coming.

Discussion

  • @brianroemmele Brian Roemmele on x
    Jürgen is a breath of fresh air in “the AI debate”. I learned many of my Neural Network skills from his 1990s pioneer work. He was doing AI and thinking about AI before most. We need more of these voices to speak up. https://twitter.com/...
  • @andrew_n_carr Andrew Carr on x
    As the weird cousin of AI, I agree https://twitter.com/...