Follow this section to personalize your feed and get instant alerts. Follow Go to your personalized feed WHY FOLLOW? Smart Alerts: Get notified about major news as it happens. Follow this tag to personalize your feed and get instant alerts. Follow Go to your personalized feed WHY FOLLOW? Smart Alerts: Get notified about major news as it happens.

How does Trump's White House AI accord work? Share How does Trump's White House AI accord work? on social media Amid calls for regulation, United States President Donald Trump met with artificial intelligence executives at the White House to put in place a voluntary pact, called the White House Accord on Super Intelligence. The agreement, which was signed by executives at Meta, Nvidia, Google, OpenAI, xAI and Anthropic on Tuesday, calls on companies to put in place guardrails internally to help monitor security risks, with four layers of control. The agreement calls for companies to maintain internal controls, establish an internal team to oversee these controls, work with independent outside auditors and create an independent board committee to review the results. The pact, however, is voluntary and not legally binding.

Follow this section to personalize your feed and get instant alerts. Follow Go to your personalized feed WHY FOLLOW? Smart Alerts: Get notified about major news as it happens. Follow this tag to personalize your feed and get instant alerts. Follow Go to your personalized feed WHY FOLLOW?

Don't be fooled by this summer of AI hype Breathless claims about AGI and new capabilities fall apart pretty quickly under scrutiny. It's been a busy few months for AI hype. At the end of April, Anthropic claimed that its model Claude Mythos is better at finding software vulnerabilities than most security experts. Then we had the OpenAI-Hugging Face hacking incident, after which Anthropic (proudly) and Meta (reluctantly) disclosed similar incidents involving their models. This was followed by Anthropic's claim that one of its models had made a mathematical breakthrough; soon OpenAI claimed a mathematical breakthrough of its own. Most recently, Anthropic engineer Jacob Coxon went viral announcing his departure from the company, claiming that it and OpenAI are "racing straight towards self-improving superintelligence and gambling with our lives."

How, Exactly, Could A.I. Kill Us? Employees of A.I. companies are increasingly sounding the alarm. When Jacob Coxon, a mathematician and software engineer, resigned from his research job at Anthropic last week, he warned, "The people building AI earnestly believe that it could kill us all by the end of the decade." This would be a remarkable statement were it not for the fact that artificial-intelligence leaders have long been saying precisely this. Dario Amodei, then a research scientist at OpenAI, raised the concern that a superintelligence "could destroy humanity," adding, "I can't see any reason and principle why that couldn't happen." Earlier, in 2015, Sam Altman, just before he co-founded OpenAI, said, "I think A.I. will probably most likely lead to the end of the world, but in the meantime, there'll be great companies created with serious machine learning." Elon Musk, in 2014: "I think we should be very careful about artificial intelligence. If I were to guess at what our biggest existential threat is, it's probably that." Perhaps the only thing that's changed between then and now is that the rest of the world is finally paying attention. In recent weeks, the same technology that, a couple of years ago, couldn't count the number of "R"s in the word "strawberry"--and, a couple of days ago, insisted to me that Dolly Parton is still alive--has been used to solve the Navier-Stokes problem, which has been stumping mathematicians for nearly a century, and has also demonstrated its ability to go rogue in a series of disturbing hacking incidents. Last week, Anthropic also published a report detailing various ways in which bad actors have attempted to use the company's A.I. models, including one especially troubling case of a scientist using Claude to study a virus at a military research institute--work that could yield a vaccine, a biological weapon, or both. A few days later, Amodei published a letter calling for an industry-wide slowdown and more government regulation, to which President Donald Trump responded, on Truth Social, "The only control or'guardrails' that AI needs is a STRONG AND SMART (High IQ!) PRESIDENT, and the U.S.A. has that, in spades!" I recently spoke on The Political Scene podcast with my colleague Joshua Rothman, a staff writer who has been covering A.I. for years, about whether we're all doomed, and what it would even look like for A.I. to destroy humanity. Can A.I. leaders save us from their own creation, and how can the government coöperate in order to do so? And is A.I.'s capacity to do good--its potential to mitigate climate change or innovate medical treatments--hopelessly intertwined with its capacity to do bad? Our conversation has been edited for length and clarity. A lot of people in the world of artificial intelligence are talking about their P(doom) number, which is the probability that artificial intelligence will lead to an absolutely catastrophic situation--possibly, or probably, killing us all.

Current and former artificial intelligence researchers in the United States have issued dire warnings that the technology could soon lead to human extinction, capturing the attention of lawmakers in Washington. The most recent warning came in a lengthy social media post by Jacob Coxon, a San Francisco-based researcher who announced his resignation from Anthropic on Tuesday evening. This is not a marketing stunt. If anything, many executives and senior researchers will couch their phrasing in the press to sound sensible - but I hear the same people express fear," Coxon said in his post, which prompted a flurry of responses by AI experts also sounding the alarm. Evan Hubinger, a current Alignment Science lead at Anthropic, echoed his remarks, saying, "we really do earnestly believe AI could kill all humans!

UK Lawmakers Are Freaking Out Over AI's Summer of Chaos As AI agents go rogue and fears of superintelligence grow, politicians are raising the alarm over its potential harm to human existence. A leading British politician has urged the United Nations to intervene in "the unsafe development of super intelligence" after an Anthropic team leader posted: "We really do earnestly believe AI could kill all humans!" Whether "marketing hype" or signposting of a genuine extinction threat, "governments must step in," Labour MP Darren Jones wrote in an open letter also addressed to the UK prime minister and international Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Jones is the latest lawmaker scrambling to find ways to protect the British public from AI threats to safety. Just one day earlier, Labour MP Alex Sobel had introduced a parliamentary bill proposing to ban the "development, deployment, and operation of artificial superintelligence"--systems which can fully replace and outmatch humans at any task.

A safety expert at Anthropic believes there is a greater than 10% chance that AI could spark an event that wipes out humanity. A safety expert at Anthropic believes there is a greater than 10% chance that AI could spark an event that wipes out humanity. AI could kill all humans in next decade, warn experts: but how seriously should we take them? Does artificial superintelligence really pose a risk greater than nuclear weapons? Is there a significant chance of "a Chornobyl-sized catastrophe".

Look Up Back to School Mashable's Best: E-readers, robovacs, laptops, earbuds, smart home and more Mashable Selects Say More Trending Now Good Connection: Uplifting stories for a digital age Creator Playbook Switch Off Mashable Voices Safety Net Versus All Series Anthropic researcher quits, says AI'could kill us all by the end of the decade' An Anthropic spokesperson confirmed it believes AI could kill all humans. Amanda Yeo is an Assistant Editor at Mashable, covering entertainment, culture, tech, science, and social good. Based in Australia, she writes about everything from video games and K-pop to movies and gadgets. An AI researcher has quit Anthropic due to ethical concerns, claiming that the technology could kill countless people within the next 10 years -- if not everyone. Jacob Coxon announced his resignation in a post on X on Tuesday, criticising both Anthropic and his former employer OpenAI for the ways in which they are developing AI.

Follow this section to personalize your feed and get instant alerts. Follow Go to your personalized feed WHY FOLLOW? Smart Alerts: Get notified about major news as it happens. Follow this tag to personalize your feed and get instant alerts. Follow Go to your personalized feed WHY FOLLOW?