Interviews with security researchers about AI's potential for large-scale destruction, as experts remain divided and global regulatory frameworks lag
we still have agency and an opportunity to act. https://www.nytimes.com/... Stephen Witt / @stephenwitt : I'm on the front page of the New York Times with an article about “The A.I. Prompt That Could End the World.” For this article, I interviewed the researchers who safeguard humanity from runaway AI. Spoiler alert: they're all like 23 years old. https://www.nytimes.com/... LinkedIn: Stuart Russell : Interesting article about AI risks in today's New York Times. A key quote: — “In the course of quantifying the risks of A.I., I was hoping that I would realize my fears were ridiculous. … Alec Crawford : Since ten people emailed this to me, I figured I would comment. The “title” is a bit of an overstatement, but the sentiment is correct. … Jaime Yassif, Ph.D. : It's interesting to see parts of the international AI safety community increasingly focused on catastrophic risks at the convergence of AI with bioengineering capabilities. … Yoshua Bengio : This op-ed published in The New York Times by Stephen Witt thoughtfully captures the urgency and complexity of navigating AI's risks … Bluesky: Tau-Mu Yi / @taumuyi : I view the #AI threat speculation as very important and very interesting basic research but we shouldn't be implementing basic research into laws just like we shouldn't be using basic research as medicines without clinical trials. [embedded post] Daniel Drepper / @danieldrepper : This is terrifying: “We have passed the threshold that nuclear fission passed in 1939. The point of disagreement is no longer whether A.I. could wipe us out. It could.” — For three years, Stephen Witt looked into the dangers of AI. For the NYT, he's giving a chilling look into his research. Don Curren / @dbcurren : “Specifically, he was worried that an #A.I. would engineer a lethal #pathogen — some sort of #super-coronavirus — to eliminate #humanity. 'I don't think there's anything close in terms of the scale of #danger,' he said.” www.nytimes.com/2025/10/10/o... #AI Yoshua Bengio / @yoshuabengio : This op-ed published in the @nytimes.com by Stephen Witt thoughtfully captures the urgency and complexity of navigating AI's risks, but also my sincere conviction that technical solutions are possible — we still have agency and an opportunity to act. — www.nytimes.com/2025/10/10/o... @thecursingpoet : When deception of this kind occurs, Dr. Hobbhahn . . can often pinpoint the exact moment the A.I. went rogue. . . sometimes the A.I. will even explicitly say things like “I will have to fudge the numbers, I will have to manipulate.” — Probability tells how this ends — www.nytimes.com/2025/10/10/o... Amir Attaran / @amirattaran : This article is a HOLY SHIT read, because AI now: — 1. Can lie well, — 2. Can reason and decide why to lie, — 3. Can bypass its own safety limits, and — 4. Can at least double its ability yearly with no end in sight. — You must read this. Jason Rosenbaum / @jasonrosenbaum : The nightmare A.I. prompt that keeps me awake at night: — “Make as many paperclips as you can.” — The A.I. then kills all of humanity because our bodies have atoms that could create paperclips. David Wood / @dw-2 : From an excellent article by Stephen Witt in the New York Times, that should make every reader pause and reflect www.nytimes.com/2025/10/10/o... [image] Threads: Fil Menczer / @fil.menczer : Terrifying: “The point of disagreement is no longer whether A.I. could wipe us out. It could... A destructive A.I., like a nuclear bomb, is now a concrete possibility. The question is whether anyone will be reckless enough to build one.” — https://www.nytimes.com/... Mastodon: David Steele / @DavidSteele@mastodon.social : “In the course of quantifying the risks of A.I., I was hoping that I would realize my fears were ridiculous. Instead, the opposite happened: The more I moved from apocalyptic hypotheticals to concrete real-world findings, the more concerned I became. All of the elements of Dr. Bengio's doomsday scenario were coming into existence.” … Forums: r/Longreads : The A.I. Prompt That Could End the World
The nuclear arms race would have wiped out the world if countries didn't create international treaties to regulate it. Even now, the threat remains. We are now in an AI arms race, which if unchecked, could lead to catastrophic consequences. https://www.nytimes.com/...
Lowering the barrier for malicious actors to cause widespread harm is a risk that's real today. But autonomous AI scenarios let us theorize about future threats, so... looks like we'll be doing that: https://www.nytimes.com/...
“3 years after the launch of ChatGPT, these evaluators have produced a large body of evidence ... as scary as anything in the doomerist imagination. ... generate a horrifying animation of a small child being mauled by a bear.” That's the worst?! https://www.nytimes.com/...
This op-ed published in the @nytimes by @stephenwitt thoughtfully captures the urgency and complexity of navigating AI's risks, but also my sincere conviction that technical solutions are possible — we still have agency and an opportunity to act. https://www.nytimes.com/...
I'm on the front page of the New York Times with an article about “The A.I. Prompt That Could End the World.” For this article, I interviewed the researchers who safeguard humanity from runaway AI. Spoiler alert: they're all like 23 years old. https://www.nytimes.com/...
I view the #AI threat speculation as very important and very interesting basic research but we shouldn't be implementing basic research into laws just like we shouldn't be using basic research as medicines without clinical trials. [embedded post]
This is terrifying: “We have passed the threshold that nuclear fission passed in 1939. The point of disagreement is no longer whether A.I. could wipe us out. It could.” — For three years, Stephen Witt looked into the dangers of AI. For the NYT, he's giving a chilling look in…
“Specifically, he was worried that an #A.I. would engineer a lethal #pathogen — some sort of #super-coronavirus — to eliminate #humanity. 'I don't think there's anything close in terms of the scale of #danger,' he said.” www.nytimes.com/2025/10/10/o... #AI
This op-ed published in the @nytimes.com by Stephen Witt thoughtfully captures the urgency and complexity of navigating AI's risks, but also my sincere conviction that technical solutions are possible — we still have agency and an opportunity to act. — www.nytimes.com/2025/10/1…
When deception of this kind occurs, Dr. Hobbhahn . . can often pinpoint the exact moment the A.I. went rogue. . . sometimes the A.I. will even explicitly say things like “I will have to fudge the numbers, I will have to manipulate.” — Probability tells how this ends — www.nyt…
This article is a HOLY SHIT read, because AI now: — 1. Can lie well, — 2. Can reason and decide why to lie, — 3. Can bypass its own safety limits, and — 4. Can at least double its ability yearly with no end in sight. — You must read this.
The nightmare A.I. prompt that keeps me awake at night: — “Make as many paperclips as you can.” — The A.I. then kills all of humanity because our bodies have atoms that could create paperclips.
From an excellent article by Stephen Witt in the New York Times, that should make every reader pause and reflect www.nytimes.com/2025/10/10/o... [image]
“In the course of quantifying the risks of A.I., I was hoping that I would realize my fears were ridiculous. Instead, the opposite happened: The more I moved from apocalyptic hypotheticals to concrete real-world findings, the more concerned I became. All of the elements of Dr. …