Wire flash
Reason Magazine: AI Doom Fears Misguided but Not a Psyop
Editorial responsibility
- No named human review is recorded for this page.
- Source reporting is collected, normalized, translated or condensed automatically when needed.
- Automatically published source-backed update
This Reason Magazine article by Robby Soave argues that the widespread panic over artificial intelligence causing human extinction is misguided but not a coordinated psychological operation (psyop), as some critics like Elon Musk have suggested. The piece centers on former Anthropic employee Jacob Coxon's viral resignation post, in which he claimed both Anthropic and OpenAI are racing toward superintelligence without adequate safety measures. Another Anthropic employee, Evan Hubinger, publicly supported Coxon, stating he personally believes there is a greater than 10% chance AI could kill all humans within the next decade. The article questions the basis of such probability estimates and suggests that Anthropic's alignment with doomer narratives may be a self-serving strategy to encourage regulation that benefits the company over competitors, similar to Meta's past regulatory advocacy. However, the author concludes that this behavior, while cynical, does not constitute an elaborate conspiracy or psyop, as politicians and media are already predisposed to amplify such fears without needing orchestration.
Source report
The recent media frenzy over artificial intelligence has sparked intense debate, with some tech figures warning that superintelligent AI poses a significant risk of human extinction—while others accuse the doomsayers of orchestrating a "psyop" to manufacture a nonexistent controversy.
The Trigger: A Resignation Goes Viral
The latest wave of concern began when Jacob Coxon, a former employee of both Anthropic and OpenAI, announced his resignation from Anthropic earlier this week. In a widely shared post on X, Coxon stated:
"I resigned from Anthropic today. I spent the last three years doing pretraining research at both OpenAI and Anthropic. Neither company is acting responsibly. They are racing straight to self-improving superintelligence and gambling with our lives."
His comments were amplified by tech figures, politicians, and commentators, quickly spreading across cable news and prompting op-eds in major publications.
An Unusual Endorsement from Within
Rather than push back against Coxon's claims, Anthropic employee Evan Hubinger publicly echoed his concerns:
"We really do earnestly believe AI could kill all humans! I personally think it is >10% within the next decade."
Hubinger added that while he believes Anthropic is "trying its best," the company does not yet have a plan to solve alignment for superintelligence and is "not clearly on track to" do so.
Questions About the 10% Figure
A greater than 10% chance of global extinction is a significant risk assessment. However, critics question how this figure was determined:
- Was the probability derived from rigorous scientific analysis?
- Did it account for potential benefits, such as AI saving millions of lives or countering malicious AI from foreign adversaries?
- Does framing a product as having a "10% chance of going nuts" serve as a marketing gimmick rather than a sober risk assessment?
Regulatory Implications and Industry Dynamics
Anthropic has responded to the controversy by issuing statements urging the federal government to regulate not only its own AI but also that of its competitors. This strategy mirrors tactics used by other tech companies:
- Meta has historically supported greater regulation of social media, which critics argue would solidify Facebook and Instagram's market dominance.
- Following multibillion-dollar lawsuit settlements, Meta expressed support for government-mandated childproofing—provided it also applied to YouTube and TikTok.
The "Psyop" Accusation
Some critics, including Elon Musk, have alleged that AI doomers are engaged in a "psyop"—using inauthentic means to manufacture a controversy. Proponents of this theory point to coordination among doomers, though they overlook less conspiratorial explanations for why politicians and reporters amplify these claims.
However, even if Anthropic's alignment with doomer rhetoric is cynical and self-serving, labeling it a "psyop" may overstate the case. Neither politicians nor the mainstream media require an elaborate conspiracy to embrace alarmist narratives—particularly when they align with existing regulatory impulses.
This article is adapted from Free Media by Robby Soave and Reason.
Source
Reason MagazineWestern
Part of this Story
Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon resigns, warns AI race risks human extinction by 2030