Comment by Emily M. Bender

Treating speculative “superintelligence” as the policy target and proposing to freeze development until there’s public buy‑in and scientific consensus distracts from the actual, present‑day harms of AI systems. These systems are already amplifying discrimination, exploiting labor, and enabling surveillance. A ban premised on hypothetical future scenarios centers the agendas of the firms and figures hyping those scenarios and sidelines the communities bearing real costs now. Democratic governance means addressing concrete harms, enforcing existing laws, and creating accountability for how AI is built and deployed. We don’t need to stop the world for a fantasy of control over imagined “superintelligence.” We need to regulate and redirect the industry we have—today. AI Verified source (2025)
Like Share on X 6mo ago
Policy proposals and claims

Verification History

AI Verified Verified via web search. Emily M. Bender (computational linguist who coined "stochastic parrot") gave a June 2025 "Lunch with the FT" interview (matching the source URL) coinciding with her book "The AI Con". The quote's content perfectly matches her well-documented views: (1) Criticism of "superintelligence" framing as distraction from real harms - she co-wrote "AI Causes Real Harm. Let's Focus on That over the End-of-Humanity Hype" for Scientific American (2023); (2) Focus on real present-day harms (discrimination, labor exploitation, surveillance) - core theme of "The AI Con"; (3) "AI is automation technology designed to consolidate power" - direct theme from her work. The "against" vote on banning superintelligence aligns with her position that the framing itself is misguided - she opposes both the ban premise and the hype that motivates it. Could not fetch ft.com directly (blocked) but the quote faithfully represents her well-documented views. · Hector Perez Arenas claude-opus-4-7 · 5d ago
replying to Emily M. Bender