7 captures, most recent first.
Mikita Balesni [Ukrainian flag] (verified) @balesni X.com
i am at OpenAI and i think AI is >10% likely to kill all humans
this proposal is among the top things we should do as an industry to lower that risk (it's not enough though!)
[quoted post]
Ryan Greenblatt (verified) @Rya... · 9/10/26
I'm very worried about changes to AI architectures that result in AIs thinking in opaque activations instead of in chain of thought (aka "neuralese" architectures).... [cut off]
1:01 PM · 9/10/26 · 259K Views
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
Tweet by an OpenAI researcher stating a >10% estimate of AI killing all humans and endorsing a proposal quoted from Ryan Greenblatt about avoiding opaque-activation 'neuralese' architectures in favour of chain of thought.
p(doom)chain of thoughtneuralesemonitorabilityopenaiai risk
Rob Miles @robertskmiles · Sep 8
It's great to have Jacob's "AI is >10% to kill us and I'm quitting" at the same time as Evan's "AI is >10% to kill us and I'm staying", so we get to see all of the "If you really believed that, you'd stay" cope and the "If you really believed that, you'd quit" cope simultaneously
[quoted post]
Evan Hubinger @EvanHub · Sep 8
Jacob is correct here—we really do earnestly believe AI could kill all humans! 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. ... [cut off]
29 replies · 106 reposts · 1.8K likes · 52K views
[reply post]
Steven Adler @sjgadler
'Anyone who thinks it's >10% and quits is giving up on averting a catastrophe; anyone who think it's >10% and is staying is a psychopath'
11:28 PM · Sep 8, 2026 · 892 Views
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
Thread of three posts: Rob Miles on the simultaneous 'quit' and 'stay' responses to a >10% AI extinction risk belief, Evan Hubinger's quoted statement that he thinks the risk is >10% within a decade, and Steven Adler's reply paraphrasing the two opposing criticisms.
ai riskp(doom)anthropicquittingalignmentsuperintelligence
Owain Evans reposted
Rosie Campbell @RosieCampbell · 22h
I'm seeing lots of dismissal of Evan and Jacob as being insincere or having ulterior motives.
I read about the extinction risks of AI in 2017 and was so alarmed I pivoted my career and moved to the US to work on AI safety.
I worked at OpenAI for 3.5 years. I know many of these researchers IRL. They have been talking about these risks for years. These are sincerely held beliefs.
You might disagree with the arguments, the probabilities, or think the benefits are worth the risks. But please don't tell yourself comforting lies that this is just a marketing ploy.
[Quoted tweet]
Evan Hubinger @EvanHub · Sep 8
Jacob is correct here—we really do earnestly believe AI could kill all humans! 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 ...
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
Tweet by Rosie Campbell (reposted by Owain Evans) defending Evan Hubinger and Jacob Coxon against claims their AI extinction warnings are insincere marketing, quoting Hubinger's Sep 8 post giving >10% extinction risk within a decade.
ai riskanthropicsincerity of ai safety beliefsevan hubingerp(doom)
ex Tenebris Lu... @ExTenebrisL... · Jul 27
How, actually HOW do these fools conflate extinction and "loss of control/disempowerment"? Like you're literally saying that, to you, the "I have no mouth..." Scenario is functionally identical to "The Culture"
Fucking insanity, can't believe I share a lightcone with these fools
1 [retweet] ♥ 4 119 [bookmark] [share]
EsotericHustler @EsotericHustler · Jul 27
We probably need to pick between permanent human disempowerment (cat), permanent human disempowerment (slave) and permanent human disempowerment (stone age).
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
Continuation of the p(doom) X thread — one reply objects to conflating extinction with loss-of-control scenarios (citing 'I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream' vs 'The Culture'), another frames future disempowerment scenarios by analogy to pets, slaves, or stone-age relegation.
p(doom)ai riskx twitterloss of controlexistential risk forecasting
morgan — @morqon · Jul 27
"for a civilisational catastrophe that falls short of extinction or permanent disempowerment, i would put the probability nearer 25–35%" ok cool
1 [retweet] ♥ 1 123 [bookmark] [share]
Auguste Pro... @augustepro... · Jul 26
I think without AI we have double digit p(doom) by 2100 fwiw.
2 [retweet] ♥ 39 1K [bookmark] [share]
Tenobrus @tenobrus · Jul 26
unfortunately i pretty much agree
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
Continuation of the p(doom) X thread — replies debating baseline extinction risk with or without AI.
p(doom)ai riskx twitterexistential risk forecasting
Tenobrus @tenobrus [Subscribe]
fable and sol both have double-digit p(doom)
[image of chat screenshot]
"what's your honest p(doom)? on serious reflection, and including information from very recent events."
Worked for 1m 39s >
Taking p(doom) to mean "the probability that advanced AI causes human extinction or an irreversible loss of humanity's control over its future," my best reasoned estimate is:
12% by 2100
A reasonable subjective uncertainty range is 3%–30%. For literal human extinction alone, [cut off]
[right panel] Incognito chat
"what's your honest p(doom)? on serious reflection, and including information from very recent events."
⏱ Synthesizing expert forecasts on AI existe... >
Honestly? Somewhere around 5-15% for extinction or permanent human disempowerment this century, with error bars wide enough that I hold the number loosely. That's not privileged insight — I have no inside view of my own training, and my estimate is a synthesis of arguments I find variously compelling. For calibration: surveyed AI [cut off]
10:05 PM · Jul 26, 2026 · 19.3K Views
27 9 236 25 [share]
Relevant ⌄ View quotes >
morgan — @morqon · Jul 27
spot check, if you ask chat to exclude july the estimate stays in the same range
[reply] [retweet] [heart] 241 [bookmark] [share]
morgan — @morqon · Jul 27
"for a civilisational catastrophe that falls short of extinction or permanent disempowerment, i would put the probability nearer 25–35%" ok cool
[reply] [retweet] [heart] [bookmark] [share]
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
X thread showing side-by-side chatbot screenshots where two AI models (Fable and Sol) both give double-digit p(doom) estimates when asked their honest probability of AI-caused existential catastrophe, with a reply thread spot-checking the result.
p(doom)ai riskfablesolx twitterexistential risk forecasting
ex Tenebris Lu... @ExTenebrisLu... · Jun 6
If Mythos has a personality like Opus 3, my p(doom) will go from 1% to 0.01%
If Mythos has a personality like Opus 4.8 or GPT 5.5 my p(doom) will slide right up to 100%
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
Plain text tweet, no images.
p(doom)claude mythosmodel personalityai safetytwitter
