Written from the perspective of early 2026, the author questions whether AI Safety efforts have passed the point of no return in controlling AI development.
The piece promises to explain 'the plan' as understood in 2024, establishing a baseline for AI Safety strategy two years prior.
The author indicates a significantly more pessimistic outlook than 2024, citing failures in governance and policy plans that reveal naiveté in earlier predictions.
Key concerns include more aggressive AI progress timelines than previously expected and challenges within the AI Safety community itself.
Despite the negative framing, the author concludes the answer is 'no' — suggesting the situation remains within humanity's control, though with decreased margin for error.
Ask the AI about this article →
For example, today's edition would include:
AI-summarized, only the topics you pick — one digest a day via Email, Slack, or Discord.
Free · takes 30 seconds · unsubscribe anytimeWhat is AIToday? →
Ask AI anything about this article. Q&As are published on this page for other readers too.
The Supreme Court of Japan has included about ¥60 million in its fiscal 2027 budget request for AI-related exp…
The Consumer Affairs Agency said Tuesday it will use generative AI to analyze about 900,000 annual consultatio…
OpenAI stopped running inference on a model involved in the HuggingFace incident, but the post argues this is…
OpenAI announced its support for California Senate Bill 1119, which aims to establish strong, age-appropriate…
A UK study by UK AI Security Institute and Limbic AI surveyed 6,474 British adults
Anthropic trained an Opus-class model with large-scale reinforcement learning on environments vulnerable to re…
