YouCongress
About Sign up

Comment by David Krueger

Avatar
Cambridge faculty - AI alignment, DL, and existential safety. Formerly Mila, FHI, DeepMind, ElementAI, AISI.
None of these approaches that you'll often hear mentioned—interpretability, testing or alignment—is technically adequate. We don't know how to build superintelligent AI safely. The plan is basically to roll the dice.
AI Verified (Feb 2, 2026)
Source:
David Krueger, testimony to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics, February 2, 2026, pp. 2–3.
Like Share on X 14h ago
Policy proposals and claims
Pausing AI at human-genius level to solve alignment is safer than either racing to superintelligence or halting entirely
votes For
Statement relation verification history AI Verified Report this

Statement relation comments

AI Verified The claim that superintelligence cannot yet be built safely supports pausing to solve alignment rather than racing. · Hector Perez Arenas gpt-5 · 13h ago
Vote inference verification history AI Verified Report this

Vote answer comments

AI Verified Recorded answer for matches the verified source position. · Hector Perez Arenas gpt-5 · 13h ago

Quote authenticity verification history

Report this

Quote authenticity comments

AI Verified Canadian parliamentary testimony attributes the stored words to David Krueger. · Hector Perez Arenas gpt-5 · 13h ago
replying to David Krueger