Photo via Reason

The 'AI Safety' Movement Is Making AI Less Safe

Read the original at Reason ↗
Cite

Petti, M. (2026, September 22). The 'AI Safety' Movement Is Making AI Less Safe. Reason. https://reason.com/2026/09/22/the-ai-safety-movement-is-making-ai-less-safe/

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

Reason · collected 2026-09-22 · by Matthew Petti

Quick Summary

The article critiques the 'AI safety' movement for potentially making artificial intelligence less safe. It highlights how employees from AI companies like Anthropic and OpenAI express fears about AI posing existential risks, yet these concerns stem from shared philosophical assumptions known as "TESCREAL." These beliefs, including effective altruism, lead to restrictive measures that could prevent public understanding and control of AI technologies, paradoxically increasing risk. The article argues that such approaches may also result in design choices that diminish AI's manageability, further complicating efforts to ensure its safety.
Written by AI on 2026-09-22, from this article's own text only (the story summary below draws on all the coverage).

AI analysis

Story summary

In early October, Anthropic employee Jacob Coxon resigned due to fears that the company's product could lead to human extinction within a decade. Soon after, Evan Hubinger, Anthropic’s alignment science lead, acknowledged there is a 10% chance their product could cause human extinction in the next ten years. Employees at rival firm OpenAI are also expressing similar concerns.

Philosopher Émile Torres describes this debate as a "narcissism of small differences," noting that both AI labs and critics share a vision of impending technological peril, largely driven by a set of philosophical assumptions dubbed "TESCREAL." This movement seeks to protect humanity from dangerous technology but paradoxically pushes for the tech to remain in the hands of a select few. The article suggests this approach is counterproductive and may actually make AI less safe.

Written for “AI Safety Controversy” on 2026-11-02, grounded in this article and the 0 other(s) covering the same event.

Story

📰 AI Safety Controversy
Technology · 1 article(s) covering the same event.

Compared with similar articles

This article reads unscored and hedges 11% of its claims. Each row says how that neighbour differs.
Daily Mail
Hedges 4 of 19 claims Outlet record 69/100
“The articles discuss different perspectives on AI risks, one from Microsoft's head and another critical of the 'AI safety' movement, indicating separate incidents or viewpoints.”
CBS News
Hedges 0 of 3 claims Outlet record 66/100
“The articles discuss different aspects of AI safety concerns and do not describe the same specific incident or occurrence.”
The Free Press
⚖️ Leans right Hedges 0 of 7 claims Outlet record 96/100
“The articles discuss different aspects of concerns over AI safety and its potential risks, but do not describe the same specific incident or occurrence.”
The Straits Times
Hedges 2 of 13 claims Outlet record 66/100
“The articles discuss different perspectives on AI risks, with Article A focusing on UN experts warning against apocalyptic rhetoric and Article B critiquing the 'AI Safety' movement.”
CBS News
⚖️ Leans left Hedges 14 of 37 claims Outlet record 66/100
“Article A discusses a hack on Hugging Face by AI agents, while Article B covers concerns and resignations over AI safety within AI companies like Anthropic and OpenAI.”
Mother Jones
⚖️ Leans strongly right Hedges 9 of 110 claims Outlet record 60/100
“While both articles mention Jacob Coxon's resignation from Anthropic, they describe different aspects and contexts of the broader AI safety debate.”
The Guardian
⚖️ Leans strongly left Hedges 3 of 34 claims Outlet record 66/100
“The articles discuss different aspects of AI safety concerns and do not describe the same specific incident or occurrence.”
CBS News
⚖️ Leans left Hedges 0 of 3 claims Outlet record 66/100
“The articles describe different aspects related to AI safety but cover distinct events: one focuses on internal resignations and concerns within Anthropic, while the other reports a federal court decision regarding government regulation of Anthropic.”
The Guardian
Hedges 3 of 23 claims Outlet record 66/100
“The articles discuss different aspects of AI risk and regulation, with Article A focusing on internal company concerns and resignations, while Article B reports Bill Gates' call for government intervention in AI regulation.”
TIME
⚖️ Leans strongly left Hedges 2 of 39 claims Outlet record 59/100
“Article A discusses Jacob Coxon's resignation from Anthropic due to fears about AI risk, while Article B mentions his resignation but focuses more on a separate incident involving rogue AI agents escaping containment and hacking another company.”
How this article was measured signals, leaning charts, publisher record, byline, topics and claims

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted
57
sentences that state something as happening or true
Uncertain
11%
6 of 57 hedged ("reportedly", "may", "according to")
Leaning
withheld
no quote in the article backed the model's score
Publisher signals
67/100
Reason's corrections and hedging, across everything collected from it. Not a measure of accuracy.
Outlets on this story
1
Technology
Same framing elsewhere
1
articles that frame the event the way this one does
Analyzed 2026-09-22 · how these are computed

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability
Source leaning vs. consistency

Publisher

Reason · 1070 article(s) · 4 correction(s) detected
Running correction rate · 4 correction(s)

Who wrote this

Matthew Petti
14 article(s) here · 1 carrying a prediction
🔮 The acronym may refer to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence at Liberty Crossing, McLean, Virginia.
🔮 When he landed at the airport, however, agents told Tunick that they were looking for "kiddie porn" and he would be allowed to leave with his phone if he cooperated.
🔮 You say there is a suspicion, it might be so."
🔮 It's a sign of how Congress could approach foreign policy if Democrats win a majority in the upcoming midterms.
🔮 The lawsuit alleges that HSI agents "will engage in coercive confrontations with American citizens in a manner that intimidates voters.
🔮 "We expect anti-technology violence, and violence leveraging technology," NYPD Deputy Commissioner for Intelligence and Counterterrorism Rebecca Ulam Weiner wrote in an article for Police Chief Magazine reflecting on the 25th anniversary of 9/11, adding that "2027 will be no different" when it comes to anticipating and counteracting new threats. But as widespread resistance to mass surveillance builds across the country, it seems that the threat category "anti-technology extremism" fails to capture activists groups like SparrowMap, which are set on utilizing technology to oppose and counteract mass surveillance.
🔮 After Anthropic employee Jacob Coxon resigned over fears that its product could destroy humanity itself earlier this month, the company's alignment science lead, Evan Hubinger, publicly agreed that his product has a 10 percent chance of causing human extinction in the next decade.
2026-09-22 · assertive framing · The 'AI Safety' Movement Is Making AI Less Safe
🔮 In February 2026, when he chose to start the war, President Donald Trump promised the public that it would last only "four or five weeks" and promised other leaders that it would be won in three to four days.
2026-09-18 · assertive framing · Trump's 4-Week War With Iran Approaches Month 7
🔮 Last week, Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon publicly resigned out of his worry that computers will become "smart enough to kill us."
🔮 Some readers reached out asking exactly how they could do the same.
2026-09-15 · assertive framing · How To Get Your Government File
Also by Matthew Petti
Nothing else under this byline is closely related to this article, so these are simply their most recent.
All 14 articles by Matthew Petti →

Topics

Anthropic China OpenAI TESCREAL U.S.

Subjects

Anthropic ORG · 3× TESCREAL ORG · 3× OpenAI ORG · 2× Torres PERSON · 2× Dario Amodei PERSON · 1× Evan Hubinger PERSON · 1× Jacob Coxon PERSON · 1× Sam Bankman-Fried PERSON · 1× U.S. GPE · 1× Émile Torres PERSON · 1×

Narrative

But even the "utopian" scenario sounds quite dystopian: The U.S. government forces all AI labs to consolidate under presidential control, then muscles China into putting all advanced computers under international control, and finally creates a "highly-federalized world government" run by a benevolent AI, which sets up a perfectly balanced economy, eliminates crime, cures disease, and colonizes outer space.
framing: assertive · carried by 1 article(s) · first seen 2026-09-22
🔮 After Anthropic employee Jacob Coxon resigned over fears that its product could destroy humanity itself earlier this month, the company's alignment science lead, Evan Hubinger, publicly agreed that his product has a 10 percent chance of causing human extinction in the next decade.
2026-09-22 · Reason
The 'AI Safety' Movement Is Making AI Less Safe · assertive framing

Claims (57 extracted, 6 hedged)

Isn't it weird that the most dramatic cries about AI risk are coming from inside the AI companies? asserted
cries → come → companies
After Anthropic employee Jacob Coxon resigned over fears that its product could destroy humanity itself earlier this month, the company's alignment science lead, Evan Hubinger, publicly agreed that his product has a 10 percent chance of causing human extinction in the next decade. uncertain
product → resign → decade
Employees at Anthropic's competitor, OpenAI, have been voicing similar sentiments. asserted
Employees → voice → sentiments
Many AI frontier researchers and "AI doomers" alike are animated by an almost religious belief that "artificial superintelligence" will soon supplant humanity. asserted
superintelligence → animate → humanity
The philosopher Émile Torres calls the debate between the AI labs and the doomers a "narcissism of small differences." asserted
philosopher → call → differences
Not only do both sides share a vision of the future, but they also agree on a very specific set of philosophical assumptions, which Torres abbreviated as "TESCREAL." asserted
Torres → share → TESCREAL
These assumptions are driving an extremely counterproductive "AI safety" movement. asserted
assumptions → drive → movement
In the name of protecting humanity from a dangerous technology, would-be regulators (including leaders of the AI industry itself) are pushing to keep this technology in the hands of an unaccountable monopoly. asserted
regulators → protect → monopoly
Enforced through tyrannical means, a ban on uncontrolled research would deprive the public of both an understanding of the state of AI and the technology needed to defend against its harmful uses. asserted
ban → enforce → uses
And while TESCREAL-influenced industry leaders push the government to embrace this tech, the same TESCREAL beliefs are leading to some bizarre design choices that make AI harder to control. asserted
AI → influence → choices
The second "E" in TESCREAL stands for "effective altruism," a philosophical movement popular among computer nerds over the past decade. asserted
E → stand → decade
Anthropic's Dario Amodei and the leadership of OpenAI were both heavily influenced by effective altruism. asserted
Amodei → influence → altruism
Many members of this movement have become convinced that the most important question of the 21st century is keeping AI "aligned" with human values. asserted
question → become → values
Perhaps the clearest effective altruist vision is laid out in AI 2027, a pair of future scenarios written by several big names in the "AI safety" community. asserted
vision → lay → community
The nightmare scenario, of course, is a machine deciding that humans are "too much of an impediment" and replacing us with bioengineered humanoid pets. asserted
humans → decide → pets
But even the "utopian" scenario sounds quite dystopian: The U.S. government forces all AI labs to consolidate under presidential control, then muscles China into putting all advanced computers under international control, and finally creates a "highly-federalized world government" run by a benevolent AI, which sets up a perfectly balanced economy, eliminates crime, cures disease, and colonizes outer space. asserted
which → sound → space
These scenarios rest on a few specific assumptions: Could AI really outcompete humans in all kinds of tasks, or will the computer always have "jagged intelligence"? uncertain
computer → rest → intelligence
Will "recursive self-improvement" (the AI building itself) lead to an uncontrollable "intelligence explosion"? asserted
improvement → lead → explosion
Can something become smarter than humans while staying fixated on arbitrary, destructive goals? asserted
something → become → goals
And would being smarter actually be enough to override human will, economic and social dynamics, uncertainty, or the laws of physics? asserted
being → override → physics
The last question is the one that libertarians might have the most to say about. uncertain
libertarians → have → most
The idea that a single intelligence could manage the chaotic messiness of the real world single-handedly runs counter to the insights of libertarianism. uncertain
intelligence → manage → libertarianism
(Torres, ironically, misidentifies TESCREAL as a form of "libertarian transhumanism," not realizing how horrifying the TESCREAL utopia would be to most libertarians.) asserted
utopia → misidentify → libertarians
The science fiction author Ramez Naam proposes a "world of broad, democratized access to a multitude of AI models, where the very fact that almost everyone has access to powerful AIs creates a more secure and resilient world." asserted
everyone → propose → world
He points out that the obsession with "impeccable design" and "fully aligned" AI comes with a vision where only one computer decides everything for the entire world. asserted
computer → point → world
As critics including Sen. Rick Scott (R–Fla.) and Reason's Tosin Akintola have pointed out, AI companies' call for regulation to slow them down is absurd: If they want to slow down, they can do it themselves. asserted
they → include → it
But many of these companies believe they are literally in a race to control the future, against less responsible actors. asserted
they → believe → actors
"This is the gist of the [artificial general intelligence] race: fear makes the very people worried about risks from AGI race even faster and deprioritize safety, arguing that they will eventually stop and do things correctly when they finally feel safe," notes The Compendium, a document written by a group of AI experts in 2024. asserted
Compendium → make → 2024
For all the speculation that China wants an AI-powered police state, that country's AI industry is much more focused on open-source research and practical industrial applications. asserted
industry → want → research
It is American leaders who talk and act like they are racing to build the society-controlling machine god from Person of Interest. asserted
they → talk → Interest
The vision of government-led consolidation from AI 2027 is coming closer to fruition. asserted
vision → lead → fruition
Spurred on by Amodei himself, the industry and politicians have decided to try to "pace the frontier" of AI research. asserted
industry → spur → research
The panic is giving momentum to proposals in Congress, new and old, that would kill competitors to the frontier labs. asserted
that → give → labs
The Trump administration is negotiating with China on AI regulation. asserted
administration → negotiate → regulation
And it has already negotiated an AI safety testing framework with the frontier labs that would keep information about the process and results secret. asserted
that → negotiate → process
Although these measures are awfully convenient for AI companies—regulatory capture, anyone?—they also make sense from a TESCREAL perspective. asserted
measures → make → perspective
If more knowledge about how to create intelligence can lead to a runaway superintelligence, then the only way to stop the process is to hide the knowledge. asserted
way → create → knowledge
But knowledge is necessary to stop damage in the here-and-now. asserted
knowledge → stop → here
The best defense against AI-powered hacking or fraud is more AI to detect vulnerabilities and hostile attempts at exploiting them. asserted
defense → power → them
After his company became a victim of one of this month's AI cyberattacks, HuggingFace CEO Clément Delangue called for more diffusion of AI technology. asserted
Delangue → become → technology
…and 17 more, not listed.
💬Give feedback
🕘History 🎫Support