Those building cutting-edge AI say it could wipe us out, and the New Yorkers asks, in detail, what that would actually look like. In a conversation with AI editor and journalist Joshua Rothman, Tyler Foggatt explains why insiders are suddenly going public with fears they’ve been expressing privately for years, from Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon’s warning to resign to CEO Dario Amodei’s call to “advance the frontiers” of AI progress. Rothman sets his own “P(doom)” number – the probability that AI will lead to catastrophe – at around 10%, which he considers terribly high. He also reviews what’s changed, including autonomous AI agents involved in a high-profile hack of Hugging Face, models helping solve seemingly intractable math problems, and attempts to misuse it for bioweapons research.
The discussion separates the possibility of a sci-fi-style “AI takeover” from the more immediate risk that current systems will be used – or misfired – in ways that amplify existing threats, from cyberattacks to autonomous weapons. The article also examines whether AI’s potential benefits can be separated from its dangers, why the industry wants regulation even as President Trump dismisses AI risks as a “hoax,” and what it means that, for now, people like Amodei seem to be our best hope for fending off the risks. “What bothers me the most is that…we’re in a world where this technology exists, and the government is not going to save us,” Rothman says. “It’s really up to these tech leaders to save us.” For a more complete picture of how AI could be derailed, click here.
Gn bussni
