Comment by Eric Schmidt

We are moving well past regulatory understanding, government understanding of what is possible. That’s why, in my view, A.I. is begging for global rules. Think of institutions the world already knows: an IPCC to organize scientific consensus and, for the riskiest, compute‑heavy systems, an IAEA‑style body rooted in the U.N. system to set standards, inspect, and verify. We did this for nuclear technology because the stakes were existential; with frontier A.I., the stakes are at least comparable in their potential for harm if we get it wrong. A U.N.-anchored watchdog could focus on the narrow slice that truly warrants it: the most powerful training runs and deployments. It would not micromanage every app or model. But it would give governments confidence that someone with access and authority is watching the red lines and sounding the alarm when needed, so innovation can continue without sleepwalking into catastrophe. AI Unverifiable source (2023)