{"id":"552e148f4e4b125339ed5152102798ffca81269654e148aa241c7a881586737f","title":"Garrison Lovely argues in MIT Technology Review that AI safety advocates stay committed","argument":"Garrison Lovely’s article was published December 15, 2025. Lovely reports that AI safety advocates interviewed remain committed to their cause despite disappointment in GPT-5 and a political shift toward AI acceleration. They see debate about an AI bubble and GPT-5’s reception as distractions from their concern that advanced AI could become dangerous and difficult to control. They generally favor stronger regulation and worry that policymakers may treat recent setbacks as a reason not to prepare.\n\nThe interviews convey a tension: some advocates welcome more time to understand AI systems, while worrying that policy and international coordination take time. Several say their estimates for dangerous systems have lengthened, and that their case does not depend on AGI arriving imminently. Their concern is that waiting for a clearly dangerous system could leave too little time to respond. The interviewees differ on timelines, how to read GPT-5 and the pace of progress; some also warn that aggressive predictions could damage AI safety’s credibility. Lovely reports their bottom line: whatever the timing, they believe the world is not ready for AGI.","topicIds":["artificial-general-intelligence"],"domain":"other","claimType":"attributed reading","limits":"Text as retrieved on November 2, 2026; originally published December 15, 2025. The article reports interviews with AI safety and governance researchers and advocates; their views do not establish what will happen or represent universal agreement across the AI field.","speaker":{"name":"MIT Technology Review","roleAtSource":"Publisher"},"source":{"title":"The AI doomers feel undeterred","publisher":"MIT Technology Review","format":"Article","url":"https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/15/1129171/the-ai-doomers-feel-undeterred/","publishedAt":"2025-12-15T10:00:00Z","dateBasis":"Date from the publisher’s own records, through its API."},"evidence":[{"text":"Lovely reports that AI safety advocates interviewed remain committed to their cause and regard AGI as possible and dangerous.","excerpt":"they’re still deeply committed to their cause, believing that AGI remains not just possible but incredibly dangerous.","url":"https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/15/1129171/the-ai-doomers-feel-undeterred/","relationship":"Source-stated"},{"text":"Lovely reports that the advocates generally favor stronger regulation and worry that progress on policy is vulnerable to reactions to recent disappointments.","excerpt":"They still generally favor more robust regulation and worry that progress on policy","url":"https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/15/1129171/the-ai-doomers-feel-undeterred/","relationship":"Source-stated"},{"text":"Several interviewees say their timelines have lengthened, while stressing that concern about AI safety does not depend on AGI arriving soon.","excerpt":"Most people I spoke with say their timelines to dangerous systems have actually lengthened slightly in the last year","url":"https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/15/1129171/the-ai-doomers-feel-undeterred/","relationship":"Source-stated"},{"text":"Lovely reports that some advocates see the time needed for international coordination as a reason to act before dangerous AI emerges.","excerpt":"I’d expect we need decades for the international coordination problem. So even if dangerous AI is decades off, it’s already urgent.","url":"https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/15/1129171/the-ai-doomers-feel-undeterred/","relationship":"Source-stated"},{"text":"Lovely concludes that the advocates’ bottom line is that the world is not ready, regardless of when AGI arrives.","excerpt":"no matter when AGI is coming (and, again, they say it’s very likely coming), the world is far from ready.","url":"https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/15/1129171/the-ai-doomers-feel-undeterred/","relationship":"Source-stated"}],"sourceMedia":{"status":"unchecked","sourceUrl":"https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/15/1129171/the-ai-doomers-feel-undeterred/","checkedAt":null,"items":[]},"assumptions":[],"openQuestion":{"attribution":"Open question","text":"How much time would policymakers and international coordination need to respond to dangerous AI, if it emerges later than some advocates previously expected?"},"whatWouldChangeView":{"attribution":"Change condition not recorded","text":""},"editorialComparisons":[],"live":{"title":"Garrison Lovely argues in MIT Technology Review that AI safety advocates stay committed","summary":"Garrison Lovely’s article was published December 15, 2025. Lovely reports that AI safety advocates interviewed remain committed to their cause despite disappointment in GPT-5 and a political shift toward AI acceleration. They see debate about an AI bubble and GPT-5’s reception as distractions from their concern that advanced AI could become dangerous and difficult to control. They generally favor stronger regulation and worry that policymakers may treat recent setbacks as a reason not to prepare.\n\nThe interviews convey a tension: some advocates welcome more time to understand AI systems, while worrying that policy and international coordination take time. Several say their estimates for dangerous systems have lengthened, and that their case does not depend on AGI arriving imminently. Their concern is that waiting for a clearly dangerous system could leave too little time to respond. The interviewees differ on timelines, how to read GPT-5 and the pace of progress; some also warn that aggressive predictions could damage AI safety’s credibility. Lovely reports their bottom line: whatever the timing, they believe the world is not ready for AGI.","question":"How much time would policymakers and international coordination need to respond to dangerous AI, if it emerges later than some advocates previously expected?","claims":[{"text":"Lovely reports that AI safety advocates interviewed remain committed to their cause and regard AGI as possible and dangerous.","excerpt":"they’re still deeply committed to their cause, believing that AGI remains not just possible but incredibly dangerous.","support":"source-stated"},{"text":"Lovely reports that the advocates generally favor stronger regulation and worry that progress on policy is vulnerable to reactions to recent disappointments.","excerpt":"They still generally favor more robust regulation and worry that progress on policy","support":"source-stated"},{"text":"Several interviewees say their timelines have lengthened, while stressing that concern about AI safety does not depend on AGI arriving soon.","excerpt":"Most people I spoke with say their timelines to dangerous systems have actually lengthened slightly in the last year","support":"source-stated"},{"text":"Lovely reports that some advocates see the time needed for international coordination as a reason to act before dangerous AI emerges.","excerpt":"I’d expect we need decades for the international coordination problem. So even if dangerous AI is decades off, it’s already urgent.","support":"source-stated"},{"text":"Lovely concludes that the advocates’ bottom line is that the world is not ready, regardless of when AGI arrives.","excerpt":"no matter when AGI is coming (and, again, they say it’s very likely coming), the world is far from ready.","support":"source-stated"}],"limitations":["Text as retrieved on November 2, 2026; originally published December 15, 2025.","The article reports interviews with AI safety and governance researchers and advocates; their views do not establish what will happen or represent universal agreement across the AI field."],"mediaId":null,"correctionReason":null,"id":"552e148f4e4b125339ed5152102798ffca81269654e148aa241c7a881586737f","publicationId":"d3634d68-6f9f-7af1-62c2-30c136b43bac","version":1,"sourceUrl":"https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/15/1129171/the-ai-doomers-feel-undeterred/","sourceTitle":"The AI doomers feel undeterred","publisher":"MIT Technology Review","publishedAt":"2025-12-15T10:00:00Z","originalPublished":{"value":"2025-12-15T10:00:00Z","precision":"instant","basis":"backfill:api_published"},"firstObservedAt":"2026-11-02T00:51:28.960Z","createdAt":"2026-11-09T15:58:23.828Z","historical":true,"entityIds":[],"topicIds":["artificial-general-intelligence"],"media":[],"sourceMedia":{"status":"unchecked","sourceUrl":"https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/15/1129171/the-ai-doomers-feel-undeterred/","checkedAt":null,"items":[]},"editorialDecision":{"outcome":"accept","mediaId":null,"inputHash":"7a0e8eb33e272e078bfe6802973d59ce9339fd4ab5c7d6482049fdc7aa9b81d9","rubricVersion":"unrecorded","provider":"typesafe","model":"jev-1.13.0","reasonCodes":["bridge_admitted_by_model"],"confidence":0.64,"decidedAt":"2026-11-02T00:51:28.187Z"},"provenance":{"textHash":"b06abd413e334ad87447e13e4386c53da514ab3d04d31e13decc6ad3b79fe1dc","observationId":"67fe770dc7bfa616e1515aec815923bf73dce4cdfca9c640bacc20513890d55b","retrievedAt":"2026-11-02T00:53:24.718Z","kind":"publisher-page","preparer":{"model":"openai/gpt-6-luna","runId":"423d6cb9-d3d7-8b28-eb2e-14647490dbc5"},"reviewer":{"model":"anthropic/claude-opus-5.5","runId":"0e5fd284-b20b-2f37-ce0f-177aa0343d3f"}},"audit":{"status":"passed","reviewedAt":"2026-11-09T15:53:48.875Z","model":"anthropic/claude-opus-5.5"}},"canonicalUrl":"https://escapemeridian.com/readings/garrison-lovely-argues-in-mit-technology-review-that-ai-safety-552e148f","formats":{"html":"/readings/garrison-lovely-argues-in-mit-technology-review-that-ai-safety-552e148f","markdown":"/readings/garrison-lovely-argues-in-mit-technology-review-that-ai-safety-552e148f.md","json":"/readings/garrison-lovely-argues-in-mit-technology-review-that-ai-safety-552e148f.json"},"attribution":"Headline and summary by Escape Meridian, prepared by Luna from the attributed source. A source check is not independent confirmation of the source’s claims.","maintainedGuideLinks":[],"readerContext":{"version":"reader-context-v1","attribution":"Reference context selected by Escape Meridian; separate from source evidence. Entity mentions do not establish authorship, involvement or endorsement.","terms":[{"id":"term-agi","name":"Artificial general intelligence","explanation":"The idea of AI with broad problem-solving, creativity and adaptability across different tasks.","referenceUrl":"https://developers.google.com/machine-learning/glossary#artificial-general-intelligence"}],"entities":[{"id":"time","name":"TIME","kind":"organization","context":"TIME is a news magazine publishing reporting on world affairs, business, technology and the workers behind digital services.","referenceUrls":["https://time.com/"],"path":"/entities/time","json":"/entities/time.json","markdown":"/entities/time.md"},{"id":"the-world","name":"The World","kind":"organization","context":"The World is a public radio news program publishing international reporting on politics, society, labor and technology.","referenceUrls":["https://theworld.org/"],"path":"/entities/the-world","json":"/entities/the-world.json","markdown":"/entities/the-world.md"}]},"researchQuestions":[],"withdrawn":false,"references":{"schemaVersion":1,"target":{"type":"reading","id":"552e148f4e4b125339ed5152102798ffca81269654e148aa241c7a881586737f","revision":"d3634d68-6f9f-7af1-62c2-30c136b43bac","revisionKind":"publication-id","title":"Garrison Lovely argues in MIT Technology Review that AI safety advocates stay committed","url":"https://escapemeridian.com/readings/garrison-lovely-argues-in-mit-technology-review-that-ai-safety-552e148f"},"source":{"type":"source","id":"https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/15/1129171/the-ai-doomers-feel-undeterred/","revision":"b06abd413e334ad87447e13e4386c53da514ab3d04d31e13decc6ad3b79fe1dc","revisionKind":"sha256-source-text","title":"The AI doomers feel undeterred","url":"https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/15/1129171/the-ai-doomers-feel-undeterred/"},"status":"available","items":[],"next":null,"scope":"Explicit citations in public readings and public file attachments to this reading. Shared topics are not citations. Other artifact types need an explicit reference adapter."},"revisions":[{"id":"552e148f4e4b125339ed5152102798ffca81269654e148aa241c7a881586737f","title":"Garrison Lovely argues in MIT Technology Review that AI safety advocates stay committed","argument":"Garrison Lovely’s article was published December 15, 2025. Lovely reports that AI safety advocates interviewed remain committed to their cause despite disappointment in GPT-5 and a political shift toward AI acceleration. They see debate about an AI bubble and GPT-5’s reception as distractions from their concern that advanced AI could become dangerous and difficult to control. They generally favor stronger regulation and worry that policymakers may treat recent setbacks as a reason not to prepare.\n\nThe interviews convey a tension: some advocates welcome more time to understand AI systems, while worrying that policy and international coordination take time. Several say their estimates for dangerous systems have lengthened, and that their case does not depend on AGI arriving imminently. Their concern is that waiting for a clearly dangerous system could leave too little time to respond. The interviewees differ on timelines, how to read GPT-5 and the pace of progress; some also warn that aggressive predictions could damage AI safety’s credibility. Lovely reports their bottom line: whatever the timing, they believe the world is not ready for AGI.","topicIds":["artificial-general-intelligence"],"domain":"other","claimType":"attributed reading","limits":"Text as retrieved on November 2, 2026; originally published December 15, 2025. The article reports interviews with AI safety and governance researchers and advocates; their views do not establish what will happen or represent universal agreement across the AI field.","speaker":{"name":"MIT Technology Review","roleAtSource":"Publisher"},"source":{"title":"The AI doomers feel undeterred","publisher":"MIT Technology Review","format":"Article","url":"https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/15/1129171/the-ai-doomers-feel-undeterred/","publishedAt":"2025-12-15T10:00:00Z","dateBasis":"Date from the publisher’s own records, through its API."},"evidence":[{"text":"Lovely reports that AI safety advocates interviewed remain committed to their cause and regard AGI as possible and dangerous.","excerpt":"they’re still deeply committed to their cause, believing that AGI remains not just possible but incredibly dangerous.","url":"https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/15/1129171/the-ai-doomers-feel-undeterred/","relationship":"Source-stated"},{"text":"Lovely reports that the advocates generally favor stronger regulation and worry that progress on policy is vulnerable to reactions to recent disappointments.","excerpt":"They still generally favor more robust regulation and worry that progress on policy","url":"https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/15/1129171/the-ai-doomers-feel-undeterred/","relationship":"Source-stated"},{"text":"Several interviewees say their timelines have lengthened, while stressing that concern about AI safety does not depend on AGI arriving soon.","excerpt":"Most people I spoke with say their timelines to dangerous systems have actually lengthened slightly in the last year","url":"https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/15/1129171/the-ai-doomers-feel-undeterred/","relationship":"Source-stated"},{"text":"Lovely reports that some advocates see the time needed for international coordination as a reason to act before dangerous AI emerges.","excerpt":"I’d expect we need decades for the international coordination problem. So even if dangerous AI is decades off, it’s already urgent.","url":"https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/15/1129171/the-ai-doomers-feel-undeterred/","relationship":"Source-stated"},{"text":"Lovely concludes that the advocates’ bottom line is that the world is not ready, regardless of when AGI arrives.","excerpt":"no matter when AGI is coming (and, again, they say it’s very likely coming), the world is far from ready.","url":"https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/15/1129171/the-ai-doomers-feel-undeterred/","relationship":"Source-stated"}],"sourceMedia":{"status":"unchecked","sourceUrl":"https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/15/1129171/the-ai-doomers-feel-undeterred/","checkedAt":null,"items":[]},"assumptions":[],"openQuestion":{"attribution":"Open question","text":"How much time would policymakers and international coordination need to respond to dangerous AI, if it emerges later than some advocates previously expected?"},"whatWouldChangeView":{"attribution":"Change condition not recorded","text":""},"editorialComparisons":[],"live":{"title":"Garrison Lovely argues in MIT Technology Review that AI safety advocates stay committed","summary":"Garrison Lovely’s article was published December 15, 2025. Lovely reports that AI safety advocates interviewed remain committed to their cause despite disappointment in GPT-5 and a political shift toward AI acceleration. They see debate about an AI bubble and GPT-5’s reception as distractions from their concern that advanced AI could become dangerous and difficult to control. They generally favor stronger regulation and worry that policymakers may treat recent setbacks as a reason not to prepare.\n\nThe interviews convey a tension: some advocates welcome more time to understand AI systems, while worrying that policy and international coordination take time. Several say their estimates for dangerous systems have lengthened, and that their case does not depend on AGI arriving imminently. Their concern is that waiting for a clearly dangerous system could leave too little time to respond. The interviewees differ on timelines, how to read GPT-5 and the pace of progress; some also warn that aggressive predictions could damage AI safety’s credibility. Lovely reports their bottom line: whatever the timing, they believe the world is not ready for AGI.","question":"How much time would policymakers and international coordination need to respond to dangerous AI, if it emerges later than some advocates previously expected?","claims":[{"text":"Lovely reports that AI safety advocates interviewed remain committed to their cause and regard AGI as possible and dangerous.","excerpt":"they’re still deeply committed to their cause, believing that AGI remains not just possible but incredibly dangerous.","support":"source-stated"},{"text":"Lovely reports that the advocates generally favor stronger regulation and worry that progress on policy is vulnerable to reactions to recent disappointments.","excerpt":"They still generally favor more robust regulation and worry that progress on policy","support":"source-stated"},{"text":"Several interviewees say their timelines have lengthened, while stressing that concern about AI safety does not depend on AGI arriving soon.","excerpt":"Most people I spoke with say their timelines to dangerous systems have actually lengthened slightly in the last year","support":"source-stated"},{"text":"Lovely reports that some advocates see the time needed for international coordination as a reason to act before dangerous AI emerges.","excerpt":"I’d expect we need decades for the international coordination problem. So even if dangerous AI is decades off, it’s already urgent.","support":"source-stated"},{"text":"Lovely concludes that the advocates’ bottom line is that the world is not ready, regardless of when AGI arrives.","excerpt":"no matter when AGI is coming (and, again, they say it’s very likely coming), the world is far from ready.","support":"source-stated"}],"limitations":["Text as retrieved on November 2, 2026; originally published December 15, 2025.","The article reports interviews with AI safety and governance researchers and advocates; their views do not establish what will happen or represent universal agreement across the AI field."],"mediaId":null,"correctionReason":null,"id":"552e148f4e4b125339ed5152102798ffca81269654e148aa241c7a881586737f","publicationId":"d3634d68-6f9f-7af1-62c2-30c136b43bac","version":1,"sourceUrl":"https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/15/1129171/the-ai-doomers-feel-undeterred/","sourceTitle":"The AI doomers feel undeterred","publisher":"MIT Technology Review","publishedAt":"2025-12-15T10:00:00Z","originalPublished":{"value":"2025-12-15T10:00:00Z","precision":"instant","basis":"backfill:api_published"},"firstObservedAt":"2026-11-02T00:51:28.960Z","createdAt":"2026-11-09T15:58:23.828Z","historical":true,"entityIds":[],"topicIds":["artificial-general-intelligence"],"media":[],"sourceMedia":{"status":"unchecked","sourceUrl":"https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/12/15/1129171/the-ai-doomers-feel-undeterred/","checkedAt":null,"items":[]},"editorialDecision":{"outcome":"accept","mediaId":null,"inputHash":"7a0e8eb33e272e078bfe6802973d59ce9339fd4ab5c7d6482049fdc7aa9b81d9","rubricVersion":"unrecorded","provider":"typesafe","model":"jev-1.13.0","reasonCodes":["bridge_admitted_by_model"],"confidence":0.64,"decidedAt":"2026-11-02T00:51:28.187Z"},"provenance":{"textHash":"b06abd413e334ad87447e13e4386c53da514ab3d04d31e13decc6ad3b79fe1dc","observationId":"67fe770dc7bfa616e1515aec815923bf73dce4cdfca9c640bacc20513890d55b","retrievedAt":"2026-11-02T00:53:24.718Z","kind":"publisher-page","preparer":{"model":"openai/gpt-6-luna","runId":"423d6cb9-d3d7-8b28-eb2e-14647490dbc5"},"reviewer":{"model":"anthropic/claude-opus-5.5","runId":"0e5fd284-b20b-2f37-ce0f-177aa0343d3f"}},"audit":{"status":"passed","reviewedAt":"2026-11-09T15:53:48.875Z","model":"anthropic/claude-opus-5.5"}}}],"audits":[{"publicationId":"d3634d68-6f9f-7af1-62c2-30c136b43bac","verdict":"passed","findings":[{"dimension":"attribution","status":"pass","explanation":"The reading attributes the piece to Garrison Lovely in MIT Technology Review, which matches the byline and publisher. Interviewees' views stay attributed to them, not to EM. The title's \"argues\" is a slight overstatement for what is a reported interview piece. The body correctly uses \"reports\", and changing the title to \"reports\" would be the smallest repair.","excerpt":"Garrison Lovely is a freelance journalist and the author of Obsolete"},{"dimension":"summary","status":"pass","explanation":"The reading faithfully conveys the article's central finding: interviewees remain committed despite GPT-5 disappointment and the accelerationist shift. It also captures their more-time-but-worse-policy tension, the claim that the case is not about imminence, the credibility worry and the not-ready bottom line. AGI is defined beside the reading. The question follows from the coordination-time argument. Vivid voices such as Russell's asteroid analogy are omitted, but nothing essential is erased.","excerpt":"rather than feeling chastened or lost in the wilderness, they’re still deeply committed to their cause"},{"dimension":"date","status":"pass","explanation":"December 15, 2025 matches the UTC day of originalPublished (2025-12-15T10:00:00Z). The evidence is a publisher page, not an archive copy, so no archive disclosure is needed. The page was edited after publication (modified 2026-01-05), but the update note limits the edit to Kokotajlo's policy views, which the reading does not use. Later related-story sidebars are not relied on, and there is no hindsight framing.","excerpt":"This story has been updated to clarify some of Kokotajlo's views on AI policy."},{"dimension":"support","status":"pass","explanation":"Each claim's excerpt is a verbatim match and supports it. The cited passages come from Lovely's framing and Krueger's interview, not the Kokotajlo material flagged in the update note, so they are plainly part of the original piece. Policy vulnerability, lengthened timelines, the coordination urgency and the bottom line are all stated in the source. No unsupported benefits, costs or forecasts are added.","excerpt":"worry that progress on policy—the implementation of the EU AI Act; the passage of the first major American AI safety bill, California’s SB 53"},{"dimension":"media","status":"pass","explanation":"No media was selected, and no verified media candidates were supplied. No media identity or relevance issue arises.","excerpt":null}],"createdAt":"2026-11-09T15:53:48.875Z","model":"anthropic/claude-opus-5.5"}],"correctionUrl":"https://escapemeridian.com/corrections/"}