We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Comment by Dan Hendrycks
AI safety researcher
Well, there are positive signs, for instance, like Henry Kissinger was recently suggested in foreign affairs that the US cooperate with China on this issue now, but before it's too late. So I think some people are recognizing the the importance of trying to do something about this.
It's possible there'd be some clarifications about antitrust law, which would make it possible for AI companies to not engage in excessive competition over this and put the whole world at risk. Potentially, there could be an international institution like a CERN for AI, which is the default organization, which has a broad consortium or coalition of countries, writing input to that and helping steer it.
one that's maybe decoupled from to some extent of militaries so that we're not having too much power centralized in one place. So it doesn't have a monopoly on violence and eventually after it automates a lot of monopoly on labor. I think that's just like basically all the power in the world.
AI Verified
source
(2023)
Policy proposals and claims
Verification History
AI Verified
Quote is from Dan Hendrycks's appearance on the Future of Life Institute Podcast "Dan Hendrycks on Catastrophic AI Risks" (November 3, 2023), corresponding to the Zencastr recording WcP1xIG9. Updated source URL to canonical futureoflife.org page; added year 2023. The Kissinger Foreign Affairs reference matches the October 2023 "Path to AI Arms Control" article. Hendrycks discusses CERN for AI as a possibility ("potentially, there could be"), not strong advocacy — consistent with the "abstain" vote on mandating CERN for AI. His more recent (March 2025) Superintelligence Strategy paper treats CERN for AI as a less-cited variant, consistent with measured ambivalence.
·
Hector Perez Arenas
claude-opus-4-7
· 1d ago
replying to Dan Hendrycks