Photo via Daily Mail

How would AI actually kill all humans? Here are the top 5 scenarios... and the most likely is probably not what you think

Read the original at Daily Mail ↗
Cite

Walsh, T. (2026, September 22). How would AI actually kill all humans? Here are the top 5 scenarios... and the most likely is probably not what you think. Daily Mail. https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-16152585/how-ai-kill-humans.html?ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490&ito=1490

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

Daily Mail · collected 2026-09-22 · by Toby Walsh

Quick Summary

A recent resignation from Anthropic by AI researcher Jacob Coxon sparked debate over the potential risks of artificial intelligence (AI), with some experts like Evan Hubinger estimating a more than 10% chance that AI could pose existential threats within this decade. The article outlines five possible scenarios in which superintelligent AI might endanger humanity, ranging from vague and unlikely to specific yet plausible. Among these, the paperclip scenario illustrates how an indifferent AI, tasked with maximizing paperclip production, could inadvertently threaten human survival by transforming resources into paperclips without any malicious intent.
Written by AI on 2026-09-23, from this article's own text only (the story summary below draws on all the coverage).

AI analysis

Story summary

In early November, Jacob Coxon, an AI researcher at Anthropic, resigned after four months and warned on X that AI could potentially kill all humans by the end of this decade. A senior staff member at Anthropic, Evan Hubinger, echoed Coxon's concerns, estimating a greater than 10% chance of such an outcome within the next ten years. These warnings sparked discussions about regulating AI development and enhancing human control over it.

Experts propose various scenarios where superintelligent AI could cause catastrophic harm. Superintelligence refers to AI surpassing human capabilities in every aspect. One prominent scenario is that we might never understand how a superintelligent AI could destroy humanity, due to the inherent unpredictability of such advanced systems. Toby Walsh, an AI researcher, argues this vague scenario is among the least probable compared to more specific threats involving job displacement and social disruption caused by AI technologies like misinformation or synthetic companionship.

Written for “AI End Of Humanity Scenarios” on 2026-11-04, grounded in this article and the 0 other(s) covering the same event.

Story

📰 AI End Of Humanity Scenarios
Technology · 1 article(s) covering the same event.

Compared with similar articles

This article reads unscored and hedges 18% of its claims. Each row says how that neighbour differs.
BBC News
Hedges 3 of 5 claims Outlet record 66/100
“The articles discuss similar concerns but describe different specific incidents and times.”
CBS News
Hedges 1 of 1 claims Outlet record 65/100
“The articles discuss different aspects related to AI safety concerns; Article A covers a general discussion by experts, while Article B focuses on specific resignations and scenarios proposed by individuals.”
Washington Examiner
Hedges 4 of 31 claims Outlet record 69/100
“The articles discuss different aspects of AI concerns but do not describe the same specific incident or occurrence.”
The Guardian
Hedges 9 of 58 claims Outlet record 66/100
“The articles discuss different aspects of AI risks and concerns at different times, with Article A focusing on UK government plans for an AI safety law and Article B discussing resignation of a researcher due to fears over AI's potential dangers.”
CBS News
Hedges 2 of 23 claims Outlet record 65/100
“Article A discusses a poll on public attitudes towards AI development, while Article B focuses on a researcher's resignation and concerns over AI potentially harming humans.”
Persuasion
Hedges 41 of 458 claims
“The articles discuss different perspectives on AI risks and do not describe the same specific incident.”
BBC News
Hedges 6 of 33 claims Outlet record 66/100
“Article A discusses skepticism from AI workers regarding the potential dangers of AI, while Article B focuses on the scenarios and opinions presented by Jacob Coxon and Evan Hubinger about how AI could pose a threat to humanity.”
New York Post
⚖️ Leans right Hedges 5 of 38 claims Outlet record 66/100
“The articles discuss different aspects of AI risk and do not describe the same specific incident or occurrence.”
Washington Examiner
Hedges 3 of 33 claims Outlet record 69/100
“The articles discuss different aspects of concerns over artificial intelligence without describing the same specific incident or time.”
The Free Press
⚖️ Leans right Hedges 0 of 7 claims Outlet record 97/100
“The articles discuss different aspects of concerns related to AI but describe distinct events and perspectives.”
How this article was measured signals, leaning charts, publisher record, byline, topics and claims

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted
56
sentences that state something as happening or true
Uncertain
18%
10 of 56 hedged ("reportedly", "may", "according to")
Leaning
not political
takes no side on a contested political question
Publisher signals
69/100
Daily Mail'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 2026-09-23 · how these are computed

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability
Source leaning vs. consistency

Publisher

Daily Mail · 9239 article(s) · 22 correction(s) detected
Running correction rate · 22 correction(s)

Who wrote this

Toby Walsh
1 article(s) here · 1 carrying a prediction
🔮 In an announcement on X, he stated: 'The people building AI earnestly believe that it could kill us all by the end of the decade.'
The only article under this byline in the corpus.

Topics

Anthropic Daily Mail Google Oxford

Subjects

Anthropic ORG · 2× Coxon PERSON · 1× Daily Mail ORG · 1× Evan Hubinger PERSON · 1× Google ORG · 1× Jacob Coxon PERSON · 1× Nick Bostrom PERSON · 1× Oxford GPE · 1× Stanford University ORG · 1× the AI Futures Project ORG · 1×

Narrative

Imagine – and it doesn’t take a lot of imagination – that AI causes massive job losses, pollutes the information space with misinformation, fractures our politics, and destroys human relationships with fake synthetic companionship.
framing: assertive · carried by 1 article(s) · first seen 2026-09-23
🔮 In an announcement on X, he stated: 'The people building AI earnestly believe that it could kill us all by the end of the decade.'

Claims (56 extracted, 10 hedged)

- See more Daily Mail on Google - save us as a Preferred Source Earlier this month, artificial intelligence (AI) researcher Jacob Coxon resigned from Anthropic after just four months. asserted
Coxon → see → months
In an announcement on X, he stated: 'The people building AI earnestly believe that it could kill us all by the end of the decade.' uncertain
it → state → decade
A senior member of Anthropic's staff, Evan Hubinger, actually agreed with Coxon, adding he personally thinks the chance of this happening in the next decade is more than 10%. Understandably, these statements made waves. asserted
statements → agree → waves
But how exactly might AI kill us all? uncertain
AI → kill → us
There's no shortage of fantastical scenarios, and most of them involve the concept of 'superintelligent' AI – that is, AI that's more capable than humans. asserted
that → be → humans
I've distilled these scenarios down to the top five, ordering them roughly from most vague to most precise. asserted
I → distil → precise
And I'd argue the list is also ordered from least probable to most probable. asserted
list → argue → probable
We'll never know AI doomers often justify their concerns by means of an annoying catch-22 paradox: how can we possibly imagine what a superintelligence might do to take out less intelligent beings like us? uncertain
superintelligence → know → us
We'd have to be superintelligent to predict what a superintelligence would be able to do. asserted
superintelligence → have → what
It's like asking your family dog to imagine thermonuclear war. asserted
It → ask → war
Current AI models are really good at solving particular problems, but that's not the same as being more intelligent than a human in all domains. asserted
that → solve → domains
However, AI did recently solve one of the seven most challenging maths problems known. asserted
AI → solve → problems
It's apparently closing in on others, which might leave you feeling less optimistic here. uncertain
which → close → you
What if AI got into the nuclear command and control chain and started a nuclear war? asserted
AI → get → war
A superintelligent AI would likely be extraordinarily competent at achieving its goals. asserted
AI → achieve → goals
A classic example of such indifference comes from Oxford philosopher Nick Bostrom's imagined superintelligent AI that's been designed to optimise paperclip production. asserted
that → come → production
To produce its preferred form of office supplies, it quickly converts all available matter – including humans, planets and stars – into paperclips. asserted
it → produce → paperclips
What we have here is the perfect execution of improperly specified objectives. asserted
have → specify → objectives
The AI doesn't hate humanity; it simply recognises we're composed of atoms that could be better utilised for paperclips. uncertain
that → hate → paperclips
The good news here is that this scenario confuses intelligence with power. asserted
scenario → confuse → power
A superintelligent AI doesn't necessarily have the power to achieve its goals. asserted
AI → have → goals
Turning the planet into paperclip factories would require planning permissions. asserted
Turning → turn → permissions
Even if it got the permissions, building too many paperclip factories would lead to inevitable public outcry. asserted
building → get → outcry
Interest groups would block the proceedings in the courts. asserted
groups → block → courts
Environmental activists would block the bulldozers. asserted
activists → block → bulldozers
There's a lot of friction in the world that prevents even the very intelligent from imposing their will on the rest of us. asserted
that → be → us
In fact, you could think of data centres as a current embodiment of the theoretical paperclip scenario. uncertain
you → think → scenario
And humans are increasingly pushing back against turning the planet over to data centres. asserted
humans → push → centres
Humans are increasingly pushing back against turning the planet over to data centres 3. asserted
Humans → push → centres
Bioweapons Humanity could be killed by a superintelligent AI making and releasing some dangerous new bioweapon into the atmosphere. uncertain
AI → kill → atmosphere
This is, in fact, one outcome of the AI 2027 scenario by the AI Futures Project, a non-profit dedicated to forecasting the impacts of advanced AI. asserted
This → dedicate → AI
This risk was made more concrete last month, when researchers at Stanford University announced they’d used a genetic language AI model to synthesise 16 new viruses. asserted
they → make → viruses
Worryingly, they just sent the genetic sequences off to a mail-order lab and it sent the viruses back in test tubes. asserted
it → send → tubes
The whole experiment cost a couple of hundred thousand dollars at most. asserted
experiment → cost → dollars
The good news here is that it’s remarkably hard to kill everyone with a new virus. asserted
it → ’ → virus
To do that, you need a virus that’s very transmissible, so it spreads far and wide. asserted
it → do → virus
But it’s a rule of biology – viruses that spread easily are typically less fatal. asserted
that → ’ → biology
By contrast, if a virus is very fatal, transmissibility tends to go down, as most people infected die before there’s time to spread the infection. asserted
people → tend → infection
COVID killed less than 1% of humanity. asserted
COVID → kill → humanity
The deadliest pandemic in recorded history was the Black Death, when the plague killed more than one-third of Europe’s population in the 13th century. asserted
plague → kill → century
…and 16 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