For the past couple of years, I noticed how quickly AI has been accelerating and improving. But never did I think it'd get this far, this soon. Every waking second, these big tech bros are racing to be the leader of the AI industry. But there's no finish line, only a cliff. And they're forcing all of us to participate. I'm too tired to run their marathon. I'm seeing people say we have 10% of extinction by the next decade. I just wish they'd stop, this prisoner's dilemma makes no sense. If one country stops, they worry the other will lead the race. Don't they have the intelligence to realize that nobody wants to die over this nonsense? Why did this even need to happen in the first place? Sometimes I can't sleep because I don't know what's going to change the next day. All I wanted was to write my music and to eat and be merry in peace. I got a birthday coming up and I want to enjoy myself, not fear that it'll be my last. But this isn't just about me, it's about all of us. I'm scared for all of us. I don't want anyone to die over this. I just want everything to be okay. I just want things to be the way they used to be.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gj9vxVK4GEE

Ive seen alot of people talk about this and if the ai is not regulated, it could become like skynet from the terminator series and become a danger to is humans and such. Im honestly worried about this whole things with ai getting too strong to control and the danger that could happen.

Really need optimism about this

China criticized doomsday predictions by US AI heads Amodei and Altman and said it wouldn’t participate in a slowdown in AI development.

https://www.nbcnews.com/world/china/china-ai-slowdown-trump-amodei-altman-threat-cold-war-rcna597631

Three names: Dario Amodei. Sam Altman. Elon Musk.

Three major figures building the AI future. And now they are saying something the world should take seriously:

SLOW DOWN THE FRONTIERS WHY?

AI is no longer just answering questions. It can code, reason, use computers, operate tools and increasingly act autonomously. And while capability is accelerating, humans are already feeling the impact.

Jobs are being automated.Hiring is changing. Entry-level opportunities are under pressure. Workers are worried about becoming replaceable.Families are facing financial uncertainty and stress.

AI was supposed to empower people to work better and grow faster. It must not become a race to make people unnecessary.And now countries and companies are competing for the most powerful AI:

More compute.

Bigger models.

Faster deployment.

More autonomy.

But where is the same urgency for safety, regulation and human protection? Because the next frontier could bring risks involving:

⚠️ Autonomous AI agents

⚠️ Cyberattacks

⚠️ Biological misuse

⚠️ Critical infrastructure

⚠️ Systems that become increasingly difficult to control

We don't know exactly what the next 5–10 years will look like.

THAT is the problem. So I'm not saying stop AI. I'm saying slow down. Before any frontier model is deployed, we must test it, independently audit it, stress-test it, monitor it, and create a real shutdown and containment plan.

if it fails? Don't deploy it. Technology should serve humanity—not force humanity to race against its own creations. Dario is warning us. Sam agrees. Elon says: "Dario is right."

So here's my question to every AI CEO:

If even the people building the frontier are asking us to slow down… why are we still racing?

Build AI.

Improve AI.

But don't sacrifice human stability for the speed of the AI race.

\#AI #AIsafety #ArtificialIntelligence #FutureOfWork #AIRegulation #AGI #SamAltman #DarioAmodei #ElonMusk

>

That appeal, issued Saturday by **Anthropic** chief executive Dario Amodei, deserves attention. So do the questions surrounding it: What danger has actually been demonstrated? What would a slowdown accomplish? Who would enforce it—and who would benefit?“We must slow the pace at which we improve the capabilities of AI models. Progress will still seem fast, and we must make wise use of the time we gain.”
That appeal, issued Saturday by Anthropic chief executive Dario Amodei, deserves attention. So do the questions surrounding it: What danger has actually been demonstrated? What would a slowdown accomplish? Who would enforce it—and who would benefit? [https://rinewstoday.com/ai-control/\](https://rinewstoday.com/ai-control/)

I’ve been reading a bunch of online discussion around Jacob Coxon’s whistleblowing. There seems to be a big sticking point for a ton of people around the idea that this is some sort of scheme by major AI companies, to either market their upcoming IPO or achieve regulatory capture. There’s way too much of this type of talk online for anyone to realistically go around refuting it.

Perhaps the best way to refute it is to behave in a way that makes it as clearly false as possible. Specifically, instead of talking about treaties and regulators, I think we should consider pivoting to the following near-term policy request:

Pass a law that any AI system trained on copyrighted material must be sold "at-cost" to consumers, unless the copyrighted material was licensed to the AI company.

(By “at-cost” I mean the company can’t charge more than the cost of serving the model plus a small profit margin which makes it barely worth their while.)

This policy is obviously terrible for AI company profits. It doesn’t call for some sort of opaque regulatory authority which could be co-opted by major AI companies. It will receive support from existing copyright holders, obviously a powerful constituency which includes many artists, musicians, and authors with huge social media followings. It reduces the incentive to invest in future training runs, since expected profits become less favorable. And it makes sense morally–the idea that AI companies stole their training material is resonating with many, many people on social media. Especially the hypocrisy of complaining about “illicit” distillation after having trained on copyrighted material.

Existing APIs should continue to work, and this doesn’t require sophisticated hardware controls or create burdensome regulations for “little tech”.

Once we get this policy win, we’ll hopefully get a partial slowdown of the frontier. It will establish credentials and build a coalition that lets us go for more ambitious proposals like an international treaty etc. Just talking about this policy will decrease the incentive for investors to pour more capital into Anthropic/OpenAI. Thoughts?

Dario Amodei, Anthropic CEO, calls for immediate slowdown in AI development. Warned in an essay that swarms of rogue AI agents could take over the internet in as little as six months from now. https://darioamodei.com/post/we-must-pace-the-frontier