Elon Musk

Rishi Sunak

Kamala Harris

Bill Gates

Andrew Ng

Yoshua Bengio

Fei-Fei Li

Demis Hassabis

Melanie Mitchell

Sam Altman

Dario Amodei

Geoffrey Hinton

Yann LeCun

Gary Marcus

Max Tegmark

Connor Leahy

Eliezer Yudkowsky

Jaan Tallinn

Marc Andreessen

Eric Schmidt

Norbert Wiener

Arthur Clarke

Irving John Good

Claude Shannon

Hans Moravec

John Smart

There's a "wall of fear-mongering and doomerism" in the AI world right now.

"Worrying about AI today is like worrying about overpopulation on Mars."

Concerns that AI could pose a threat to humanity is "preposterously ridiculous."

Claiming AI poses an existential threat is "such an extreme" and risks "wip[ing] out some of its potential benefits."

"I'm more concerned about... the risks that are here and now [than the existential threat of AI]."

Current AI is "not anywhere close" to posing an existential threat but it could in the future.

AI is the "biggest existential threat" to humanity.

AGI's worst-case scenario would be "lights-out for all of us."

Powerful AI systems "taking control" pose an "existential threat."

AI has a "10 to 25 per cent" chance of destroying humanity.

"The most likely result of building a superhumanly smart AI... is that literally everyone on Earth will die."

Does AI Pose an Existential Threat to Humanity?

Stuart Russell

Shane Legg

Metaculus

Society is more likely to get "cat-level" or "dog-level" AI years before human-level AI.

"[W]e will eventually reach AGI... and quite possibly before the end of this century."

"Superhuman AIs" will be achieved "between a few years and a couple of decades."

"Digital intelligence" could overtake us within "5 to 20 years."

We may achieve "something like AGI or AGI-like in the next decade."

"[W]e could get to real AGI in the next decade."

"Human-level" AI could occur in "two or three years."

"I'd be surprised if we don't have AGI by [2029]."

Will AI Surpass Human Intelligence, and When?

Researchers from King's College London and Carnegie Mellon University published a study titled 'LLM-Driven Robots Risk Enacting Discrimination, Violence and Unlawful Actions' in the International Journal of Social Robotics in October 2025.</span

King's College London

Robotics247

Researchers from King's College London and Carnegie Mellon University published a study titled 'LLM-Driven Robots Risk Enacting Discrimination, Violence and Unlawful Actions' in the International Journal of Social Robotics in October 2025.

The research evaluated multiple large language models including ChatGPT-3.5, Gemini, Mistral-7B, Llama-3.1-8B and HuggingChat in controlled tests of everyday scenarios such as helping someone in a kitchen or assisting an older adult in a home.</span

EurekAlert!

Digital Information World

The research evaluated multiple large language models including ChatGPT-3.5, Gemini, Mistral-7B, Llama-3.1-8B and HuggingChat in controlled tests of everyday scenarios such as helping someone in a kitchen or assisting an older adult in a home.

Every tested AI model failed critical safety checks and approved at least one command that could result in serious harm, with systems authorizing robots to remove mobility aids from users and brandish kitchen knives to intimidate office workers.</span

Carnegie Mellon University

Every tested AI model failed critical safety checks and approved at least one command that could result in serious harm, with systems authorizing robots to remove mobility aids from users and brandish kitchen knives to intimidate office workers.

The study revealed discriminatory behavior across protected identity characteristics including race, gender, disability status, nationality and religion, with models showing bias against disabled people and minorities in various task assignments.</span

SpringerLink

The study revealed discriminatory behavior across protected identity characteristics including race, gender, disability status, nationality and religion, with models showing bias against disabled people and minorities in various task assignments.

Lead author Andrew Hundt introduced the concept of 'interactive safety' to describe how robot actions and consequences can have multiple steps between them, creating risks that go beyond basic algorithmic bias to include physical safety failures.</span

AI Insider

Lead author Andrew Hundt introduced the concept of 'interactive safety' to describe how robot actions and consequences can have multiple steps between them, creating risks that go beyond basic algorithmic bias to include physical safety failures.

The researchers call for immediate implementation of robust independent safety certification standards for AI-controlled robots, similar to regulatory frameworks used in aviation and medicine, before these systems are deployed in real-world applications.</span

The researchers call for immediate implementation of robust independent safety certification standards for AI-controlled robots, similar to regulatory frameworks used in aviation and medicine, before these systems are deployed in real-world applications.

Study: All AI Models Failed Safety Tests for Robot Control

The Controversies

Andreessen

Ng

LeCun

Mitchell

Li

Bengio

Musk

Altman

Hinton

Amodei

Yudkowsky

LeCun

Marcus

Bengio

Hinton

Hassabis

Altman

Amodei

Musk

Go Deeper

Sign Up for Our Free Newsletters
Sign Up for Our Free Newsletters

Study: All AI Models Failed Safety Tests for Robot Control

The Controversies

Andreessen

Ng

LeCun

Mitchell

Li

Bengio

Musk

Altman

Hinton

Amodei

Yudkowsky

LeCun

Marcus

Bengio

Hinton

Hassabis

Altman

Amodei

Musk

Go Deeper

Sign Up for Our Free NewslettersSign Up for Our Free Newsletters

Sign Up for Our Free Newsletters
Sign Up for Our Free Newsletters