A powerful coalition of global voices wants the world to stop and think before crossing a line we cannot return from. The Future of Life Institute has launched a new initiative backed by hundreds of figures from science, faith, politics and the arts. Their shared message is clear: we need a prohibition on the development of superintelligence until it is proven safe, controllable and publicly accepted.
Superintelligence refers to artificial intelligence that could outperform humans in almost every cognitive task, reasoning, learning, creativity and problem-solving. Many experts warn that such systems could quickly become too complex for humans to understand or control.
The institute warns that these frontier AI systems, meaning the most advanced models being built today, could reach that level within a few years. Without safety measures, they believe the risks could become unmanageable.
Inside the coalition to stop superintelligence
The list of signatories reads like a global who’s who. It includes five Nobel Laureates, Turing Award winners, AI pioneers, security experts, faith leaders and artists. Yoshua Bengio and Geoffrey Hinton, two of the world’s most cited AI scientists, are among them. Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak, Virgin founder Richard Branson, actor Stephen Fry and former Irish President Mary Robinson have also signed.
Support comes from across political and cultural lines. Former U.S. National Security Advisor Susan Rice, Admiral Mike Mullen, evangelical leaders Johnnie Moore and Walter Kim, plus Papal AI Advisor Paolo Benanti are on the list. So are artists Joseph Gordon-Levitt, will.i.am and even Prince Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
Together, they form a politically diverse coalition united by one concern: superintelligence must not be built before it is proven safe.
Expert warnings about superintelligence risks
Yoshua Bengio, professor at the Université de Montréal, explained the stakes. “Frontier AI systems could surpass most individuals across most cognitive tasks within just a few years. These advances could unlock solutions to major global challenges, but they also carry significant risks. To safely advance toward superintelligence, we must scientifically determine how to design AI systems that are fundamentally incapable of harming people, whether through misalignment or malicious use. We also need to make sure the public has a much stronger say in decisions that will shape our collective future.”
Actor Stephen Fry shared his own warning. “To get the most from what AI has to offer mankind, there is simply no need to reach for the unknowable and highly risky goal of superintelligence, which is by far a frontier too far. By definition this would result in a power that we could neither understand nor control,” he said.
Anthony Aguirre, co-founder and Executive Director of the Future of Life Institute, said the same urgency applies to industry. “Many people want powerful AI tools for science, medicine, productivity and other benefits. But the path AI corporations are taking, racing toward smarter-than-human AI designed to replace people, is wildly out of step with what the public wants, scientists think is safe or religious leaders feel is right. Nobody developing these AI systems has been asking humanity if this is OK. We did, and they think it’s unacceptable.”
Poll results reveal public demand for AI regulation
A national U.S. poll from the institute reveals how strong public concern has become. Only 5 percent of Americans support the current approach of unregulated development. About 73 percent favor strong government oversight, and 64 percent believe superintelligence should not move forward until scientists agree it is safe and controllable.
Max Tegmark, president of the institute and a professor at MIT, summarized the results. “Ninety-five percent of Americans don’t want a race to superintelligence, and experts want to ban it,” he said.
The data sends a clear signal. People want safety, not a reckless race to the top.
A Texas mom says she spent the night in jail after speaking up online about dirty water in her town. The case was later dropped, but her story raises a troubling question: could something you post online ever put you at risk?
Missed this event? Sign up via the registration form and see our live recording.
See Kurt’s 2026 picks for practical tech and everyday upgrades.
The real dangers of the AI race
The statement warns that rushing toward superintelligence without guardrails could cause catastrophic harm. The risks include mass job loss, weakened freedoms, erosion of dignity, national security threats and even possible extinction. The coalition insists that slowing down progress is not the same as stopping it.
Supporters call for secure innovation that focuses on solving real problems in medicine, energy and education. They envision a pro-human AI renaissance built around tools that empower people instead of replacing them. Progress, they say, must serve humanity’s values, not undermine them.
What this means for you
This conversation affects everyone. As a citizen, you rely on systems that may soon be shaped by AI. Your privacy, safety and job security are all on the line.
As a worker, you already see how automation changes the workplace.
As a consumer, you will feel the results of these choices in the technology you use every day.
The coalition’s message calls for public involvement. The decision to pursue or pause superintelligence belongs to society, not just tech companies or researchers. That choice will shape the kind of future we build together.
Related Links:
- AI phishing scams fool half of workers
- AI and learning retention: Does ChatGPT help or hurt?
- AI robots reproduce paintings with artist consent
Kurt’s key takeaways
The call to prohibit superintelligence until it is proven safe has united scientists, faith leaders, policymakers and artists across traditional divides. Their plea is simple: slow down before humanity loses control of its own creation. Whether you see superintelligence as promise or peril, this debate forces us to ask what kind of intelligence we truly want guiding our future.
If artificial intelligence could soon outthink every human being, should we build it before we are sure it will obey our best intentions? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below,.
FOR MORE OF MY TECH TIPS & SECURITY ALERTS, SUBSCRIBE TO MY FREE CYBERGUY REPORT NEWSLETTER HERE
Copyright 2025 CyberGuy.com. All rights reserved. CyberGuy.com articles and content may contain affiliate links that earn a commission when purchases are made.
🎙 Now Streaming: My New Podcast: The CyberGuy Report
Kurt’s Top Deals
Deals move fast and inventory can be limited, so don’t wait too long.
| 🔥 Editor’s pick  Summer entertaining Ninja SLUSHi Machine (26% off) Frozen drinks and slushies at home in minutes. | |
| 💰 Top deal  Outdoor essential TYPEC Solar Bug Zapper (36% off) Solar-powered bug zappers for patios and camping. |
17 comments
No, we should absolutely not hit the “pause” on artificial superintelligence.
1) If the west pauses development, then China will get there first. That would allow them to dominate the world, which would be an absolute disaster.
2) Artificial intelligence has no will, drive, or priorities. What it does depends upon who is using and directing it. It can be used for great good or great evil, just like any other tool, depending upon who’s using it.
3) Defeating an ASI being used for evil requires having an ASI harnessed to do good.
4) I don’t want exciting medical advances drastically slowed down because of some fearful modern day luddites.
Agree 100%!
Mike D, I feel you are right on track, Now I am not a rocket scientist , but how does one know that super intelligence AI is safe and controllable unless it is built and tested. Just saying. But one thing I know for sure is that opponents always resort to fear mongering to something they they do not like or understand.
I share Mike D’s view. Artificial superintelligence should continue advancing, but always within firm ethical boundaries. The real threat isn’t responsible research—it’s what could happen if authoritarian powers develop AI unchecked. Such regimes could use it for surveillance, censorship, or coercion on a global scale. We must therefore lead with transparency and moral clarity, ensuring this technology uplifts humanity rather than controls it.
AI, no matter how complex, is still just a program. Rather than giving it control over any systems, or unfettered access to the internet, we should set it up as an advisory system, so it can give advice, but only people can act on that information. As long as it has no control over anything, it cannot do anything damaging other than give bad advice. I’m fine with AI-assisted literature, medical advances, art, video, etc. So far, every AI-created piece of art, video, music, or literature that I have encountered was guided by a human being asking for a specific kind of work.
I agree with Mike D.
Yes, we must have humanly intelligent control of the environment we live in and/or create. The first Adam was told to dress and keep (manage) the Garden of Eden that was already supremely “Good” in its balance and purpose. If we do not wisely “Manage” our total environment, it will “manage” us in ways we will regret. I for one do not worship science nor technology, though in my career I used both. These are tools to be used with skill and judgment that considers the big picture of humanity’s role on earth and beyond.
Fear of others advancement has often proven to be a poor motivation. Their own “faster” mistakes will consume them.
Managing and taking care are not ‘defeating” anything but disaster. There is enough evidence world wide of the pollution and dictatorial mis-management of resources. Even now we do not fully understand nature nor control it. The universe outside and the physical universe within have much yet to teach us about the integral relationships of cooperation, equality, and productive harmony. Let it be so…
SPS
Kurt, two thoughts: I notice the Global List of experts doesn’t seem to include anyone from China.
That’s a concern.
However, Mike has it all wrong. Humans never place a stop sign at intersections until motorists have been killed or injured multiple times. Call me a luddite, but We can’t afford that mistake with AI.
I’m encouraged by the motivation of this coalition, and others, to monitor the progress of ASI and inform the general public. Our government absolutely can not accomplish that with any confidence. I concur with the excellent points Mike D. made in his comment. Although I must confess to having to lookup what a Luddite is.
The destruction of hypersonic nuclear missiles launched against the United States will have to be destroyed en route before reentering the atmosphere. How do you think that will be done, with a pea shooter? AI will be the brains of specific and critical segments of our national defense. No self-appointed Chicken Little can erase the evil of the men who want to destroy us.
I’m old enough to remember the movie, 2001–A Space Odyssey and the spaceship’s onboard computer, HAL 9000. Obviously, AI has now awakened HAL. Good Luck to humanity!
How many times in the history of the world has one country ended up dominating another society due to its advancement in technology? The ability to outthink your opponents and react in a positive manner thanks to your superior intellect makes all the difference between winning and losing. History has shown that, time and time again. The one who achieves the best AI has the advantage, not just the most successful but the best protection against all other competitors. If for no other reason than that, we have to win the race. How it gets used will depend on how it’s designed to be used. Unfettered release to its own design and allowing it to go forward with no boundaries would, could, end up being the worse thing for whomever wins the game, only to end up being a victim of their own devices. But to sit back and watch another country overtake this technology just because you have reservations would be a serious mistake. Definitely develop this technology with checks and balances to ensure it will be used for the good of the world and it’s citizens and protect the world and it’s civilization against those who would use it for greedy reasons and put it to use against others for selfish reasons. This technology must be developed with controls to better life for everyone. Not as a weapon. But if necessary as a way to prevent weapons from being used against others. It really doesn’t matter what anyone says— this technology is being developed and pursued by people who would use it to dominate society if they win the race. Cure Cancer-cure Alzheimer’s— use it for healing, not killing.
This subject gives me a sense of dread. I am all in favor on slowing it down. If it proves to be unsafe, and we have acted wisely, we will be better off. I look at this the same way I look at social media. Most of us rushed head long into it, and we later found how it negatively affected some people, especially young people.
Humans can’t agree about most things especially on a planetary scale! You can bet that bad actors like Russia and China will have no interest in participating in any group that will restrict their ability to further their current goals!
I agree. But the genie is already out of the bottle. Will they manage to put the brakes on it, even in countries like China (and here in the US Deep State) which see it as a boon to ultimate control? Doubtful. Mankind has a very poor record on such monumental decisions. Those in power seek more power over peace…or even survival of the species (other than their own).
I think Mike D. is right. No way should the government get involved. Yet. They would drag things to a complete stop and nothing would ever get done. We don’t want China to get ahead of us.
While I believe that we will have to be competitive in AI, I’m completely against the unregulated activity so far. WATER and ELECTRICITY demands need to be provided by the AI data center owners and not taken from supplies for citizens. In Texas, that is what is happening and people are beginning to snap to it and are NOT happy. We need to already be further ahead with desalinating ocean water in a responsible manner. People scream about the downsides of desalinating, but it is really our only choice. American underground aquifers are going dry.