" A moratorium and binding international regulation of ASI is frankly our only hope."
Lord Strasburger clearly explains why experts are warning that superintelligence could lead to human extinction. He says we have no choice about what we must do.
A really great speech by Lord Strasburger in the House of Lords debate on superintelligent AI:
AI godfather Geoffrey Hinton says countries will collaborate to prevent AI taking over.
"On AI taking over they will collaborate 'cause nobody wants that. The Chinese Communist Party doesn't want AI to take over. Trump doesn't want AI to take over. They can collaborate on that."
It's pretty weird to see some journalists still, in 2025, trying to paint extinction risk from AI as some kind of fringe concern. Some quick reminders:
1. The 3 most cited AI researchers of all time are vocally concerned about this. One of them believes the risk of extinction is higher than 50%.
2. The CEOs of the 4 leading AI companies have all acknowledged this risk as real. Two of them openly believe that there are currently Russian Roulette odds of extinction.
3. Half of surveyed AI researchers believe that there are double-digit odds of extinction.
The last century had so many brilliant ideas.
But who did we put on a pedestal? Ayn Rand, Milton Friedman, James Buchanan, Lewis Powell.
No wonder the world today is so fucked.
We used to have many independent civilizations—if one collapsed, others could thrive and evolve. Now, we’re a single global system, interconnected and fragile. Without enough independent ‘samples’ to evolve, we risk systemic collapse.
I'm heading to Edge City Lanna! Just secured my spot and I'm really looking forward to it. If you want to join me, applications are open on the site, Edge City Lanna | Chiang Mai, Thailand https://t.co/avyGtRwF92
Counting down 4 days until #Wamotopia awakens 😺
Read 👉https://t.co/r1tM6KQI4N for more details about 👇
🪐 Theme Camps & Events Schedule
🏟️ Wamotopia Gameplay
🌱 Chiang Mai: Accommodation, Dining, Transportation
#Wamotopia awaits! See you in #ChiangMai 🧙♂️🌟
Our ICML submission on why future ML systems might be misaligned was just rejected despite all-accept reviews (7,7,5), because the chairs thought it wasn't empirical enough. So this seems like a good time to ask: how *should* the field examine concerns about future ML systems?
At this point, we cannot even determine the extent to which this is occurring, we do not have any proven solutions at our disposal to completely mitigate potentiality of this becoming an existential risk. Furthermore, we live in a globalized society with only one sample size.
My speculation: We will likely lose our ability to react to societal events if disinformation becomes convincingly realistic and inexpensive to produce. With the arrival of GPT-4, this will soon become a reality.
We are unsure if we can handle this situation, as we currently lack the necessary tools and appropriate paradigms to respond effectively. We have not yet reached a consensus on the appropriate measures to take.