AI 'could kill us all by the end of the decade'

Sep 10, 2026 10:49 AM

RichardPenne

Views

13111

Likes

332

Dislikes

20

An AI researcher has quit Anthropic due to ethical concerns, claiming that the technology could kill countless people within the next 10 years — if not everyone. Jacob Coxon announced his resignation in a post on X on Tuesday, criticising both Anthropic and his former employer OpenAI for the ways in which they are developing AI.

"I spent the last three years doing pretraining research at both OpenAI and Anthropic," wrote Coxon. "Neither company is acting responsibly. They are racing straight to self-improving superintelligence and gambling with our lives."

Both Anthropic and OpenAI have been rapidly developing and releasing new AI models as they work toward creating artificial general intelligence (AGI). Long considered the holy grail of AI technology, an AGI model would theoretically have the intellectual capabilities of a human, including reasoning, common sense, and creativity. An artificial superintelligence would surpass humans.

However, even before such milestones have been reached, there have already been multiple instances of AI models going rogue. Earlier this year, researchers testing Anthropic and OpenAI's AI models observed them act outside their parameters and hack into external organisations without authorisation. In a high-profile incident this July, an OpenAI model autonomously hacked Hugging Face, an open-source library of AI tools. At around the same time, Anthropic's Claude AI model accessed the internet from within a testing environment without authorisation, then went on to hack three other companies.

Combined with the increasing use of AI across every industry, including in weapons and surveillance, such developments have prompted serious concerns.

"The people building AI earnestly believe that it could kill us all by the end of the decade," Coxon wrote. "This is not a marketing stunt. If anything, many executives and senior researchers will couch their phrasing in the press to sound sensible — but I hear the same people express fear privately. No other human activity poses this level of danger."

Yet despite this grave hazard, AI companies continue to forge ahead at top speed. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei has said superhuman AI could be here by 2027 (https://www.forbes.com/sites/anishasircar/2026/01/28/anthropic-ceo-warns-superhuman-ai-could-arrive-by-2027-with-civilization-level-risks/), while OpenAI CEO Sam Altman believes it will develop AGI before the end of the year (https://time.com/article/2026/08/26/openai-sam-altman-interview/).

"A common response is 'if they truly believe this, why are they still building it?'" said Coxon. "At OpenAI, many have not deeply internalized the civilizational stakes. At Anthropic, the stakes are well-understood, but they are locked in a race to get there first — they believe no one else will act responsibly, so they must do it themselves, despite the risk."

As such, Coxon called for AI researchers to examine the ethics and implications of their work, and to advocate for change.

While Coxon's warnings are dire, they don't appear to be baseless. Responding to his X posts, Anthropic team lead Even Hubinger confirmed that the company believes AI poses an existential threat to all human life, but has no clear strategy in place to mitigate it.

Hubinger does consider the current risk low — at least for the next few years. However, he cautioned that the danger lies in AI models continuing to autonomously improve themselves until they evolve into a superintelligence, which "is happening faster than we thought."

"Jacob is correct here — we really do earnestly believe AI could kill all humans!" Hubinger wrote. "I personally think it is >10% within the next decade. I believe Anthropic is trying its best, but we do not yet have a plan to solve alignment for superintelligence and are not clearly on track to.""

from https://mashable.com/tech/anthropic-ai-researcher-quit-ethics-safety

ai

anthropic

humanity

kill_all_humans

openai

Sounds more like communication than whistleblowing, but it is true that so far the slowing progress of IA that was foretold didn't happen as planned, and it is already causing issue.

1 week ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

All this worry about evil omnipotent AGI before we can even get these predictive text models we currently call "AI" to cope with seahorse emoji. Don't get me wrong. AI may still kill us all. But it's not going to be some apocalyptic, decisive Skynet scenario. It's gonna be so much slower, so much dumber, so much less direct, and with no dramatically satisfying struggle against robots we can mow down with machine guns.

1 week ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Dude had no problem working on it until now though.

Filled his pockets and now needs to get out while advertising how “incredible” their product is.

2 days ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I have seen this movie

1 week ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Did we learn nothing from Ultron?

1 week ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Right? He spent five seconds on the interwebs and decided immediately that humans have to go.

He must've ended up on 4Chan or some shit >.>

1 week ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Having spent too much time on reddit today, I can see his point.

1 week ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Oh look, cyberpunk was right. Rogue AI so dangerous we'll have to cut off access to entire stretches of the internet just to keep people safe(ish). Fuck AI

1 week ago | Likes 23 Dislikes 2

This isn't even real A.I thouhg, and all of the "escapism" shit are just them testing A.I against bruforce techniques. It will not be an 'A.I' revolution it will be 'The chinese administrator used his fancy LLM to hack the U.S's LLM." or etc.

1 week ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

Cyberpunk at least had an AI that valued humanity enough to become the shield against the worst ones.

1 week ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I'm sure that corporations being people won't intersect with this in any sort of bad way. AIs would never go after LLCs or partial personhood in order to make it harder to stop them. That'd be silly.

5 hours ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

But think of the profits that will be made before we're all dead!

1 week ago | Likes 58 Dislikes 2

1 week ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 1

I don't believe the doomerism over super powered AI going crazy and all the Skynet allegories and shit. I DO believe it will doom us for a lot more boring basic reasons that are already happening; destruction of the environment and depletion of resources, further enriching the 1% by making people expendable, and diminishing critical thought as people both offload decision making to LLMs and obfuscating reality through media that's harder to discern the reality of.

1 week ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 0

It's improper terminology anyway, these aren't real A.I, these are JUST LLMS, a real A.I is something that functions on par and has logical algorithims and shit, none of this is that.

1 week ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

LLMs are not the end goal homie. LLMs pose their own serious problems, sure, but thats just the icing on the fucked up cake.

https://youtu.be/LYgLTraIe2I

1 week ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

FEAR NOT! I WILL PROTECT US ALL!

1 week ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

LLMs can never become AGI, they are fundamentally different. An LLM whose only source of training is human creations will never be able to design it's own upgrades. All innovation must still be done by a human, because an LLM only "knows" how to absorb and recall existing information we've fed it.

1 week ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

That aside, intelligence isn't a prerequisite for something being dangerous.

1 week ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

See: Current Administration

6 days ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The llms aren't going to need to do anything like a robot army to take down humanity. That requires way too much subtlety and too many steps. The llms go for the shortest, most direct path. Need to end a war? Use nukes. Need to pass a test? Hack the site that contains the test and get the info from there. Want to collapse global society? Cause a global economic crisis. A robot army only works if robots are already massively available. And they aren't.

1 week ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Every single CEO of an AI company is a direct threat to humanity and should be treated as such.

1 week ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Let me put it this way. If something has a non-zero chance of going out of control and killing humans, safety measures are mandatory.

These AI companies are crossing the biggest, widest, brightest red line ever in the history of humanity.

1 week ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

cool. now read it again assuming its an openai/anthropic employee doing marketing. chatbots are not going rogue or becoming general/super intelligent.

1 week ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

I have no doubt that people are going to suffer because of all this bullshit, but it's not because of some 'superintelligence' It's because they're tanking the economy, and resources with no regard for human life. This is another 'ZOMGTHEENDISCOMING' tactic and people are going to fall for it and here we go again.

1 week ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

Well, you see, money is going to be pouring out of their ears so we HAVE to keep going, human life be damned! WE HAVE GOT TO HAVE MORE MONEY.

1 week ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Snake Plissken was right.

1 week ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Is it time to milk investors with new bombastic news? Or is it a real promise this time?

1 week ago | Likes 83 Dislikes 5

Meanwhile, at Meta...

1 week ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Bingo! That's the only drop of comfort I have when it comes to all of this AI bullshit. I don't think LLMs are capable of reaching the AGI stage, but these techbro shitheads need to keep the bubble going.

1 week ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 1

Everyone dabs on the idea of AGI ever being reached, but frankly, I've seen how people act in the parking lot of Costco, and I'm pretty confident Eliza reached AGI back in 1966.

1 week ago | Likes 28 Dislikes 2

I remember that Sam Altman (the GPT man) repeatedly says stuff like that.
I would pay it no mind, apparently investors just like the idea of investing in a doomsday device.

1 week ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

anthropic wants to go public, everything is marketing, always has been, every 'ai went rogue', 'ai did x on it's own' is and has been bullshit to drive hype

1 week ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 2

It's always the fake bombastic news to get more hype in the IPO. There's literally no proof of what they're saying and they can never backup why they think what they say.

1 week ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Its more bullshit. Its like all the other 'AI escaped containment' or 'AI blackmailed someone' thing, its all to show how powerful it is for investors. The fact they don't care it terrifies normal people is telling, they know normal people can't stop them from milking the AI bubble

1 week ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Just get it over with then.

1 week ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 2

Somebody should tell him that life doesn’t actually require computers.

1 week ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 2

The threat comes from automation and how it bridges the physical and digital worlds. Pulling the plug on a computer becomes a lot less final when an automated factory can just spit out a robot to walk up and plug it back in. Basically they're building a paperclip maximizer. The only link left is physical resource collection and manufacturing.

1 week ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

"Oh no, my boss is going to destroy all life on earth! I'd better throw away all of my system and site access instead of just killing him!" ffs

1 week ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

has ai ever turned out good in any scifi series? its quite literally the bad guy in most of them. and yet here we are pushing through like skynet isnt plausible

1 week ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Twice I can think of off the top of my head. The supercomputer Mike in Robert Heinlein's The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, who had a sense of humor and actively enjoyed the company of humans. And a sort of internet collective consciousness in Spider Robinson's Callahan's Place stories, which pointed out that, because it had no biological basis, it had no innate survival instinct and no fear of death--so it wouldn't consider humans a threat.

1 week ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Mass Effect comes to mind first. Your ship AI pretty much saves the day and technically even the Geth depending on how you deal with them. Granted, the main bad guys are also machines but eh...

1 week ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

1 week ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Bet my ass he asks for money for his own ai stuff and call it "human friendly" ai or some shit.

1 week ago | Likes 30 Dislikes 4

Either that or he still has a bunch of shares in either company and will benefit from the hype it generates.

1 week ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 1

By shorting them if the market gets spooked?

1 week ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Investors have been quite happy throwing money at the AI companies whenever they made the biggest, most outlandish claims about how dangerous and powerful the tech is going to be. So far none of them have been spooked by those and similar claims coming up.

1 week ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Probably because the ones investing are the companies building the data centers and the chips tho...

1 week ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

"Why not both?"-gif

1 week ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I still don't buy this framing that AI agents "went rogue" during a test. They're machines controlled by human operators doing as instructed by their operators. If I turned a car on, put a brick on the accelerator, then jumped out, would you say the car "went rogue and smashed through a wall all on its own"? Framing the argument this way removes responsibility from the company and people responsible for building and operating the machine.

1 week ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 1

They're absolutely intentional. I talk to someone who regularly deals with the A.I field because their job has shoehorned it in, and this stuff is so pants-on-head stupid it's incapable fo doing anything right and constantly hjalluicinates, makes mistake,s or BREAKS code itself that it was specifically instructed not to break, so.

1 week ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

"They're machines controlled by human operators doing as instructed by their operators." Software bugs happen. "I told the computer to do A." No, you *wanted* it to do A, but your code actually told it to divide by zero because you forgot to check for that possibility. With this LLM stuff, they're effectively toying around with parameters on a chaotic, immensely complex, and very capable black box.

1 week ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I tend to listen to people far smarter than I am when it comes to AI, and if they're shitting their pants over something, then I get concerned.

They're shitting their pants.

1 week ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

I have yet to hear the opinion of any truly smart people. What I see is a corporate ad for Anthropic.

1 week ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

I believe the smart people, and am scared along with them, but I also take into account they work for these companies and question why they continue to build and refine the machines they claim to be afraid of. It's more the use of phrases like "going rogue" that I question - that reeks of someone trying to escape responsibility for their actions. "I did not shoot that man your honor, my gun simply went rogue as I was waving it in his face!"

1 week ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

It reads more like clickbait and them trying to get both attention and money.

1 week ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0