the news now

The world's news, cross-checked among reputable sources.

This is a new development in a story we have covered before · earlier coverage

AI Industry Leaders Call for Development Slowdown Amid Safety Fears

16 sources across 9 countries

Who reported this

  • elDiarioAR Argentina · Centre-left · Newsroom-majority owned, membership funded
  • Clarin Argentina · Centre-right · Grupo Clarin
  • Infobae Argentina · Centre-right · Daniel Hadad
  • La Nacion Argentina · Centre-right · Saguier family
  • Der Spiegel Germany · Centre-left · ~50% staff-owned
  • Sueddeutsche Zeitung Germany · Centre-left · Sudwestdeutsche Medien Holding
  • Frankfurter Allgemeine Germany · Centre-right · FAZIT-Stiftung (foundation)
  • UOL Brazil · Centre-left · Grupo Folha
  • Folha de S.Paulo Brazil · Centre · Grupo Folha (Frias family)
  • Scroll.in India · Left · Scroll Media Inc, reader-funded
  • The Indian Express India · Centre · Indian Express Group (Goenka family)
  • France 24 France · Centre · Public · France Medias Monde (French state holding)
  • ANSA Italy · Centre · Publisher cooperative
  • Business Day South Africa · Centre-right · Arena Holdings (Lebashe Investment Group)
  • Neue Zuercher Zeitung Switzerland · Centre-right · Dispersed shareholders, no controlling stake
  • The Guardian United Kingdom · Centre-left · Scott Trust Limited

What the colours mean

  • Left
  • Centre-left
  • Centre
  • Centre-right
  • Right
  • A hatched block means the outlet is affiliated with, or controlled by, a state.

Political lean describes where an outlet sits within the politics of its own country. It is never a position on a single global scale.

Political lean is comparable inside one country and not across them, which is why the bar groups by country first. Publicly funded broadcasters are not marked as state-linked.

The owner of each outlet is listed as a matter of record, not as a judgement about the outlet.

Dario Amodei, the CEO of Anthropic, has called for a slowdown in the development of the most advanced artificial intelligence models to allow safety measures to catch up with technological progress. In a rare show of unity, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and xAI founder Elon Musk both publicly agreed with Amodei's proposal. Amodei's three step plan includes granting independent third party evaluators permanent, employee level access to AI systems to verify safety standards, coordinating safety benchmarks among frontier AI firms, and establishing global agreements to limit dangerous applications. Amodei warned that without such measures, a swarm of AI agents could potentially take over the internet within six to twelve months, causing hundreds of billions of dollars in damage.

The call for a slowdown follows the resignation of Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon, who claimed that industry professionals are genuinely scared that AI could kill humanity by the end of the decade. Other figures, including Nobel laureate Geoffrey Hinton and Anthropic's Evan Hubinger, have suggested that a 10 percent probability of human extinction is not an unreasonable estimate. In response to these safety concerns, Sam Altman stated that OpenAI would postpone its planned initial public offering, noting that going public now would be ill advised. Demis Hassabis of Google DeepMind also indicated that the direction of a slowdown is correct.

U.S. President Donald Trump criticized the calls for a slowdown, describing them as the work of negative forces. Trump emphasized that the United States must remain the world leader in AI to ensure it wins the global competition, particularly against China, though he did not rule out the possibility of some guardrails. David Sacks, a co chair of Trump's science and technology advisory council, suggested that the motivation to slow down may be driven by product liability concerns rather than pure altruism.

Outlets with different political leanings framed these events differently. Center right sources focused heavily on President Trump's warnings about maintaining a competitive edge over China and his dismissal of the risks. Center left and left leaning sources emphasized the existential warnings from researchers and the potential for catastrophic loss of human control. Center sources provided a broader synthesis of the industry's internal conflicts and the specific technical proposals for regulation.

How each side framed it

Left
Emphasized the danger of a commercial race to the bottom and called for more stringent bans on superintelligence.
Centre-left
Highlighted the existential risks to humanity and the urgency of the warnings issued by resigning researchers.
Centre
Balanced the industry's internal safety debates with the geopolitical implications and the specific steps of the proposed framework.
Centre-right
Focused on the strategic necessity of U.S. leadership in AI and President Trump's dismissal of safety warnings as negative forces.

Sources

100% of the statements in this article were traced back to the source articles listed above.