Photo via Al Jazeera

Who gets to decide how quickly AI moves?

Read the original at Al Jazeera ↗
Cite

AlSammarraie, A. (2026, September 18). Who gets to decide how quickly AI moves? Al Jazeera. https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2026/9/18/who-gets-to-decide-how-quickly-ai-moves?traffic_source=rss

Dated when The Aporia collected the article, usually within hours of publication. Check the original for its exact date and byline.

Al Jazeera · collected 2026-09-18 · by AlHasan AlSammarraie

Quick Summary

Founders of major AI companies are calling for a slower pace in developing advanced models due to concerns about safety measures not keeping up with technological advances. This includes executives from Anthropic, OpenAI, xAI, Google DeepMind, and Microsoft, who advocate for more time to ensure the technology is safe. In contrast, Nvidia’s CEO Jensen Huang opposes slowing down, arguing that market forces alone can drive companies toward safer innovation without needing new regulations. The debate also touches on antitrust laws, with some suggesting exemptions to allow AI companies to collaborate on safety issues, while others like David Sacks from the White House worry this could reduce competition and give too much power to leading firms.
Written by AI on 2026-09-18, from this article's own text only (the story summary below draws on all the coverage).

AI analysis

Story summary

As of September 15, 2026, Dario Amodei, CEO of Anthropic, has called for slowing down the development pace of advanced artificial intelligence models due to significant safety risks. In an essay titled "We Must Pace the Frontier," published on September 9, Amodei outlined three primary measures: embedding third-party evaluators within AI companies, coordinating safety standards among democratic nations, and eventually achieving larger global coordination.

Sam Altman from OpenAI and Elon Musk have supported these proposals, while Jacob Coxon, an ex-Anthropic researcher who resigned over alignment concerns, has highlighted the urgency by stating that continuing at current rates could lead to catastrophic consequences, including human extinction within two years. Coxon's statements gained widespread attention with over 169 million views on social media.

However, there is resistance from companies like Nvidia, led by Jensen Huang, who advocate for rapid progress in AI technology despite safety concerns. This divergence of opinions underscores the debate around balancing innovation and risk management in artificial intelligence development. Despite this opposition, Amodei emphasized during a speech at Salesforce’s Dreamforce convention on September 12 that the industry must critically assess its practices to ensure safety standards are met. Meanwhile, OpenAI announced it would not go public in 2026 due to ongoing safety advancements needed. The debate over AI development pace continues to be contentious and multifaceted.

Written for “AI Development Slowdown Debate” on 2026-11-04, grounded in this article and the 14 other(s) covering the same event.

Story

📰 AI Development Slowdown Debate
Technology · 15 article(s) covering the same event. See how they differ ↓

Compared with similar articles

This article reads leans right and hedges 20% of its claims. Each row says how that neighbour differs.
Semafor
Hedges 5 of 32 claims Outlet record 59/100
“While both articles discuss concerns over AI safety and calls for regulation from industry leaders like Dario Amodei, they describe different stages or contexts of the debate.”
September 13, 2026 Same event
Letters from an American
⚖️ Leans left further left than this Hedges 10 of 65 claims
The Straits Times
Hedges 2 of 9 claims Outlet record 66/100
“The articles discuss different aspects and timeframes related to AI regulation and ethics; Article A reports on a UN call for urgent action regarding AI risks, while Article B discusses broader controversies and calls from AI company founders.”
The Free Press
Hedges 3 of 15 claims Outlet record 97/100
“The articles discuss different time frames and perspectives on AI's impact, with Article A summarizing recent warnings about AI risks while Article B focuses on a more recent call to slow down AI development by a specific company executive.”
Reason
Hedges 1 of 17 claims Outlet record 67/100
“The articles discuss different aspects of AI concerns and debates over time without focusing on a single specific incident.”
The Straits Times
⚖️ Leans left further left than this Hedges 17 of 70 claims Outlet record 66/100
“The articles discuss related themes but describe different points in time and distinct discussions around AI control and ethics.”
New York Post
⚖️ Leans left further left than this Hedges 3 of 41 claims Outlet record 66/100
“The articles discuss different aspects of AI and its impact but do not describe the same specific incident or occurrence.”
CBS News
Hedges 0 of 3 claims Outlet record 65/100
“The articles discuss different aspects of AI and ethics without referencing the same specific incident.”
Washington Examiner
⚖️ Leans left further left than this Hedges 3 of 34 claims Outlet record 69/100
“The articles discuss different aspects of artificial intelligence and its impact but do not describe the same specific incident or occurrence.”
Washington Examiner
⚖️ Leans strongly left further left than this Hedges 8 of 42 claims Outlet record 69/100
“While both articles discuss Dario Amodei's stance on AI, they describe different aspects of his statements and the broader context rather than a single identical incident.”
How this article was measured signals, leaning charts, publisher record, byline, topics and claims

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted
46
sentences that state something as happening or true
Uncertain
20%
9 of 46 hedged ("reportedly", "may", "according to")
Leaning
Leans right
of the writing, not the subject · beta estimate
Publisher signals
60/100
Al Jazeera's corrections and hedging, across everything collected from it. Not a measure of accuracy.
Outlets on this story
15
Technology
Same framing elsewhere
1
articles that frame the event the way this one does
Analyzed 2026-09-18 · how these are computed

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability
Source leaning vs. consistency

Publisher

Al Jazeera · 4902 article(s) · 3 correction(s) detected
Running correction rate · 3 correction(s)

Who wrote this

AlHasan AlSammarraie
2 article(s) here · 1 carrying a prediction
🔮 Google has signed an agreement that will bring 890 megawatts of additional nuclear capacity into the United States.
🔮 In addition, Sam Altman said that OpenAI will not be going public in 2026, as further safety advances are still required.
2026-09-18 · assertive framing · Who gets to decide how quickly AI moves?
Also by AlHasan AlSammarraie
Nothing else under this byline is closely related to this article, so these are simply their most recent.

Topics

Anthropic Google DeepMind Nvidia OpenAI xAI

Subjects

Amodei ORG · 4× China GPE · 4× Nvidia ORG · 4× Huang PERSON · 3× OpenAI ORG · 2× Sam Altman PERSON · 2× Anthropic ORG · 1× Dario Amodei PERSON · 1× Elon Musk PERSON · 1× xAI ORG · 1×

Narrative

Ever since the introduction of accessible generative AI in 2022, institutions, universities, students, scholars, activists, cognitive specialists, public policymakers and members of the public have all been divided over the ethics of its use.
framing: assertive · carried by 1 article(s) · first seen 2026-09-18
🔮 In addition, Sam Altman said that OpenAI will not be going public in 2026, as further safety advances are still required.
2026-09-18 · Al Jazeera
Who gets to decide how quickly AI moves? · assertive framing

Claims (46 extracted, 9 hedged)

Artificial intelligence (AI) has stirred up more controversy than most things in the past five years. asserted
intelligence → stir → years
Ever since the introduction of accessible generative AI in 2022, institutions, universities, students, scholars, activists, cognitive specialists, public policymakers and members of the public have all been divided over the ethics of its use. asserted
institutions → divide → use
As of the beginning of this month, even the founders of AI companies have taken the same stance. asserted
founders → take → stance
Dario Amodei, chief executive of Anthropic, released an essay calling on AI companies to slow the development of their most advanced models, as the safeguards currently in place are unable to keep up. asserted
safeguards → release → place
Shortly after Amodei’s essay, his position was endorsed by Sam Altman of OpenAI, Elon Musk of xAI, Demis Hassabis of Google DeepMind, and Satya Nadella of Microsoft. asserted
position → endorse → Microsoft
In addition, Sam Altman said that OpenAI will not be going public in 2026, as further safety advances are still required. asserted
advances → say → 2026
While on the surface this may seem like a development in the collective conscience, the problem is far more multifaceted and layered – leaving the industry and the intended audience divided. uncertain
problem → seem → industry
Take a look at the products that each AI giant sells. asserted
giant → take → that
Amodei, Altman, Musk and Hassabis sell models, while Nadella sells the cloud those models run on. asserted
models → sell → cloud
Both groups have advised slowing down. asserted
groups → advise → ?
On the other hand, Jensen Huang, founder, president, and CEO of Nvidia, sells the chips that these companies buy before they can build anything. asserted
they → sell → anything
Huang does not advise a slowdown and has instead asserted that AI does not need new legislation because market forces can push companies towards safe innovation without the need for regulation. asserted
forces → advise → regulation
Mark Zuckerberg, whose company gives its models for free, warned that the proposal could expose companies to greater legal risks. uncertain
proposal → give → risks
Some companies will benefit from a slowdown, while others will earn greater profits by moving faster. asserted
others → benefit → profits
Nvidia’s ability to charge high prices has benefitted from the intense competition between these AI companies, which fear falling behind their rivals. asserted
which → charge → rivals
If this competitive pressure decreases, companies may be less willing to pay a premium for Nvidia’s chips. uncertain
companies → decrease → chips
Hence, Huang’s opposition to the proposal may reflect both genuine concerns and Nvidia’s commercial interests. uncertain
opposition → reflect → concerns
The word the White House used In the world of AI, antitrust law prevents these companies from holding private meetings to decide what they can and cannot do. asserted
they → use → what
This is intended to prevent them from coordinating the pace of development and engaging in unfair competition. asserted
This → intend → competition
However, some of these AI companies have now come forward arguing that they should be allowed to work outside antitrust law for the sake of technological safety. asserted
they → come → safety
Huang and David Sacks, the White House AI lead, have been critical of this request, as it could reduce competition and increase the influence of these AI companies over their rivals. uncertain
it → reduce → rivals
Sacks also questioned the independence of nonprofit evaluators tasked with evaluating AI safety “independently”. asserted
Sacks → question → safety
In essence, he asks: how is it fair for one company to inspect another? asserted
company → ask → another
The clause that travels badly Amodei’s proposal would deny China access to the most powerful AI chips and advanced semiconductor manufacturing equipment, and prevent smuggling and remote access to computing capacity abroad. asserted
proposal → travel → capacity
China’s foreign ministry countered the proposal, saying that these warnings are a fearmongering tactic aimed at slowing down China’s technological advancement, echoing the Cold War. asserted
warnings → counter → War
Amodei did admit that China poses the toughest predicament for his plan. asserted
China → admit → plan
Despite its alleged advantages, the proposal gives American firms leverage over Chinese ones. asserted
proposal → allege → ones
A precedent, and why it does not fit Supporters of AI coordination have compared it with the regulation of banks following the 2008 financial crisis. asserted
Supporters → fit → crisis
Basel III was introduced only after a major financial crisis had already occurred. asserted
crisis → introduce → ?
Attempts to regulate AI before harm occurs can represent a genuine effort to prevent future risks, rather than reflecting the commercial interests of AI companies. asserted
harm → regulate → companies
Banking regulations were imposed by external regulators, whereas the proposed AI regulations would involve competing companies coordinating with one another. asserted
regulations → impose → one
What the debate is actually about Before this debate began, researchers had already issued warnings about the capabilities of AI models. asserted
researchers → begin → models
OpenAI slowed down the development of its leading systems after a security incident. asserted
OpenAI → slow → incident
Amodei and Altman have both claimed that Anthropic and OpenAI will aim to bring in independent evaluators – a practice not seen among “cartels”. asserted
Anthropic → claim → cartels
Both concerns can coexist: companies may genuinely fear the risks associated with AI while also pursuing their own commercial interests. uncertain
companies → coexist → interests
The more relevant question remains whether the proposed solution adequately addresses the problem it is intended to solve. asserted
it → remain → problem
An agreement between five major American companies, to be overseen by evaluators they fund, would not apply to international competitors such as those in China and would require an exemption from existing competition law. asserted
they → oversee → law
This solution appears to reflect the structure and interests of the AI industry more closely than the nature of the risk it is intended to address. asserted
it → appear → risk
The seats nobody is sitting in Much of the debate surrounding the pace and regulation of AI development has taken place without meaningful participation from other regions, including the Arab world. asserted
Much → sit → world
PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) estimates that $31.6 trillion will be invested in AI infrastructure worldwide by 2050. asserted
trillion → estimate → 2050
…and 6 more, not listed.
💬Give feedback · no sign-in needed

No sign-in needed for now. Your note is sent without a name, so it cannot be answered.

🕘History 🎫Support