YouCongress Polls

Whether AI is a normal technology or an unusually dangerous one, it doesn't make sense for companies to check their own homework on safety and security. Unverified source (2026)

Finally, it’s not clear how well some of the act’s provisions reflect the current state of the AI ecosystem. The act demands that labs hire an independent third party to complete an annual audit of their protocols to ensure compliance with the act. T... more Unverified source (2025)

I'm pretty confident about the productivity gains and about the wealth that is going to be created. I'm really concerned that it's not going to be evenly distributed, and that a lot of people will be hurt in a significant way. Unverified source (2026)

Whether AI's benefits are widely shared is a political question, has nothing to do with technology. Unverified source (2026)

You don't need to give up ChatGPT. You don't need to give up self-driving cars. You don't need to give up on the medical advancements. [...] It's not that the current use needs to stop. It's just that the race to make smarter and smarter machines tha... more Unverified source (2026)

Developing superintelligence is not like playing Russian roulette; it is more like undergoing risky surgery for a condition that will otherwise prove fatal. [...] Models incorporating safety progress, temporal discounting, quality-of-life differentia... more Unverified source (2026)

At this point, I think we're at a threshold moment where AGI, artificial general intelligence, is on the horizon, maybe in the next five to eight years. [...] I think it's going to be something like 10 times the impact of the Industrial Revolution, b... more Unverified source (2026)

Until some company or scientist says ‘Here’s the proof! We can definitely have a safety mechanism that can scale to any level of intelligence,’ I don’t think we should be developing those general superintelligences. We can get most of the benefits w... more Unverified source (2024)

For the last-invention story to hold, people would have to become unnecessary even as partners or supervisors to AIs. [...] We would need a world where practical know-how is fully transferable through digital channels and where responsibility can be ... more Unverified source (2026)

The creators of AI are saying, 'We are building a technology that will kill every single person on Earth with a 25% probability.' And governments are saying, 'Oh, go ahead, that's great.' Unverified source (2026)

A [central] problem with regulating frontier AI models is that a new feature emerges in these systems that is not tested, testable. [...] As long as you have this new emergent power, you have deep reasoning, deep capabilities, and they will make mist... more Unverified source (2026)

After drawing a hard line against AI abuses in democracies, we should use that precedent to create an international taboo against the worst abuses of powerful AI. [...] I recognize that the current political winds have turned against international co... more Unverified source (2026)

The question that people are debating is whether it makes sense to regulate research and development of AI. And I don't think it does. Unverified source (2023)

Dario is wrong. He knows absolutely nothing about the effects of technological revolutions on the labour market. Don't listen to him, Sam, Yoshua, Geoff, or me on this topic. Listen to economists who have spent their career studying this. [...] It's ... more Unverified source (2026)

People have the wrong intuition when they say that if AI can do my job for ten dollars an hour, then my wage falls to ten dollars and my life is terrible. A world where AI can do research or teaching at that cost is a world where AI is extremely capa... more Unverified source (2026)

Job loss is going to happen. [...] I wouldn't be surprised if we are at the beginning of decades of job displacement. Unverified source (2026)

We already have laws. We already have a way that our democracy works. We already have addressed issues of bias, consumer protection and so forth. None of those are enforced online. And so the question is, can the AI at least not break the law? Unverified source (2026)

This [...] legislation could [...] subjecting [...] to lawsuits [...]. The bill is overly broad [...] subject to litigation. [...] could subject online services to costly [...] lawsuits. Unverified source (2023)

surveillance of Americans without judicial oversight and lethal autonomy without human authorization are lines that deserved more deliberation than they got. Unverified source (2026)

It causes a lot of cases to get solved. It’s another tool we’re now not going to have. That facial recognition can potentially solve homicides, [...] Unverified source (2026)

Anybody's appearance can (given sufficient data) be faked now, at any time, for almost nothing. Because the tools for counterfeiting have gotten so good, 2026 will almost certainly see more deepfaked scams like this than the rest of history combined.... more Unverified source (2026)

Without provisions that allow for fair use and free expression online, this legislation would dramatically change the internet. Unverified source (2024)

I resigned from OpenAI. [...] AI has an important role in national security. But [...] lethal autonomy without human authorization are lines that deserved more deliberation than they got. Unverified source (2026)

To the second part of your question, I am strongly in favor of discussions internationally about things like norms. I think with this point, it would be counterproductive to have outright bans on things that people don't even fully understand what th... more Unverified source (2019)

If we go down this path of destroying jobs [and] creating more inequality, U.S. democracy is not going to survive. [...] We may need wealth taxes, because anything else we do today is still going to lead to this huge wealth gap that exists in this co... more Unverified source (2026)

Capitalism has also depended on somewhat of a power balance between labor and capital, but if it's hard in many of our current jobs to outwork a GPU, then that changes. [...] If there was an easy consensus answer, we'd have done it by now, so I don't... more Unverified source (2026)

Why pick on robots? [...] I don't think simply trying to resist or stop technology is a viable strategy. I don't think it would be a viable strategy if it was adoptable on a global basis, but it's even less viable for a single country in internationa... more Unverified source (2017)

It doesn't make sense that private individuals are deciding the fate of infrastructure for everyone else. What about all the companies and all the countries that didn't get access? Unverified source (2026)

The US totally rejects all efforts by international bodies to assert centralized control and global governance of AI. Ideological fixations on social equity, climate catastrophism, and so-called existential risk are dangers to progress and obstacles ... more Unverified source (2025)

The federal government needs a reporting threshold for all artificial intelligence companies that deliver services in Canada, where they must report to law enforcement, so there's no judgment calls in a back room that Canadians don't have a line of s... more Unverified source (2026)

If you have to report to 50 different state regulators at 50 different times with 50 different definitions, it's extremely onerous. And it's going to slow down innovation, and it's going to hinder our progress in the AI race. Unverified source (2025)

The dangerous trends in nuclear risk, climate change, disruptive technologies such as AI and biosecurity are accompanied by another frightening development: the rise of nationalistic autocracies. [...] AI is a significant and accelerating disruptive ... more Unverified source (2026)

Computer scientists often aren't good judges of the social and political implications of technology. They are so focused on the AI's mechanisms and are overwhelmed by its success, but they are not very good at placing it into a social and historical ... more Unverified source (2026)