Latest news with #existentialThreat
National Post
11-05-2025
- Politics
- National Post
For Alberta, the 'existential threat, it's from Ottawa,' Danielle Smith says
'Albertans feel an existential threat from Ottawa,' says Alberta Premier Danielle Smith. 'I think the rest of the country may feel an existential threat from Donald Trump. Alberta feels the same thing — but the existential threat, it's from Ottawa.' Article content Article content Nanos Research polls published one week after the federal election indicate nearly 30 per cent of Alberta residents support separation from Canada. Article content Article content 'The polls I'm seeing now,' Smith reports in a recent conversation, 'suggest 30 to 40 per cent. That's the highest I've ever seen.' Article content Article content The premier agrees the surging numbers could reflect the possibility Albertans believe secession is a more viable option, particularly given U.S. President Donald Trump's willingness to lend legitimacy to a unilateral declaration of separation by a Canadian province. Or, she suggests, it's 'just an indication of how mad people are at the treatment they've had for the past 10 years and the despair they're feeling that it might continue.' Perhaps even more worrisome, the same Nanos Research poll points to a generational divide. Younger Albertans are less likely than their parents or grandparents to believe being part of Canada would be better for Alberta's economy. Alberta is a young province — the youngest in Canada — and Smith knows she's got a job to do, to convince young people that Alberta, Canada is a place where you can realize your dreams. Article content The 'Alberta's Calling' campaign launched a month before Smith became premier 'worked like gangbusters,' she exclaims. 'We're attracting young minds and the best and brightest.' But, after the federal election outcome, some of these young people haven't hidden the fact they aren't happy with their seniors chewing up resources and making decisions they don't agree with. Article content Article content 'There was a TikTok phenomenon of young people doing videos,' Smith acknowledges, 'saying, 'I understand, mom and dad or grandma and grandpa, Canada is very good for you. You have a good life, good job, good income, good retirement. But I don't have that same future, so think about me when you're voting.'' Article content Article content Setting the course for prosperity for future generations is a priority for Smith, and she doesn't hide her annoyance with the suggestion, by some, that Alberta is already the wealthiest province: Why aren't we happy with our lot? Article content 'We don't just say, 'I guess we have wealth, so let's just start figuring out how to wind it down. Let's have an emissions cap so we can figure out how to wind down two million barrels of production. Let's figure out how to wind down the development of our industry because we're not allowed to build more electricity. Let's just not be aspirational and have data centres because we're not going to be able to have them come on stream anyway,'' the premier says, with obvious sarcasm. Article content That's what the future looks like, she cautions, under Liberal policies. It's not just a matter of standing still; it's a matter of winding things down. 'We are not going to do that as a province,' she concludes, in an even voice.
Yahoo
10-05-2025
- Science
- Yahoo
AI firms warned to calculate threat of super intelligence or risk it escaping human control
Artificial intelligence companies have been urged to replicate the safety calculations that underpinned Robert Oppenheimer's first nuclear test before they release all-powerful systems. Max Tegmark, a leading voice in AI safety, said he had carried out calculations akin to those of the US physicist Arthur Compton before the Trinity test and had found a 90% probability that a highly advanced AI would pose an existential threat. The US government went ahead with Trinity in 1945, after being reassured there was a vanishingly small chance of an atomic bomb igniting the atmosphere and endangering humanity. In a paper published by Tegmark and three of his students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), they recommend calculating the 'Compton constant' – defined in the paper as the probability that an all-powerful AI escapes human control. In a 1959 interview with the US writer Pearl Buck, Compton said he had approved the test after calculating the odds of a runaway fusion reaction to be 'slightly less' than one in three million. Tegmark said that AI firms should take responsibility for rigorously calculating whether Artificial Super Intelligence (ASI) – a term for a theoretical system that is superior to human intelligence in all aspects – will evade human control. 'The companies building super-intelligence need to also calculate the Compton constant, the probability that we will lose control over it,' he said. 'It's not enough to say 'we feel good about it'. They have to calculate the percentage.' Tegmark said a Compton constant consensus calculated by multiple companies would create the 'political will' to agree global safety regimes for AIs. Tegmark, a professor of physics and AI researcher at MIT, is also a co-founder of the Future of Life Institute, a non-profit that supports safe development of AI and published an open letter in 2023 calling for pause in building powerful AIs. The letter was signed by more than 33,000 people including Elon Musk – an early supporter of the institute – and Steve Wozniak, the co-founder of Apple. The letter, produced months after the release of ChatGPT launched a new era of AI development, warned that AI labs were locked in an 'out-of-control race' to deploy 'ever more powerful digital minds' that no one can 'understand, predict, or reliably control'. Tegmark spoke to the Guardian as a group of AI experts including tech industry professionals, representatives of state-backed safety bodies and academics drew up a new approach for developing AI safely. The Singapore Consensus on Global AI Safety Research Priorities report was produced by Tegmark, the world-leading computer scientist Yoshua Bengio and employees at leading AI companies such as OpenAI and Google DeepMind. It set out three broad areas to prioritise in AI safety research: developing methods to measure the impact of current and future AI systems; specifying how an AI should behave and designing a system to achieve that; and managing and controlling a system's behaviour. Referring to the report, Tegmark said the argument for safe development in AI had recovered its footing after the most recent governmental AI summit in Paris, when the US vice-president, JD Vance, said the AI future was 'not going to be won by hand-wringing about safety'. Tegmark said: 'It really feels the gloom from Paris has gone and international collaboration has come roaring back.'
The Guardian
10-05-2025
- Science
- The Guardian
AI firms urged to calculate existential threat amid fears it could escape human control
Artificial intelligence companies have been urged to replicate the safety calculations that underpinned Robert Oppenheimer's first nuclear test before they release all-powerful systems. Max Tegmark, a leading voice in AI safety, said he had carried out calculations akin to those of the US physicist Arthur Compton before the Trinity test and had found a 90% probability that a highly advanced AI would pose an existential threat. The US government went ahead with Trinity in 1945, after being reassured there was a vanishingly small chance of an atomic bomb igniting the atmosphere and endangering humanity. In a paper published by Tegmark and three of his students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), they recommend calculating the 'Compton constant' – defined in the paper as the probability that an all-powerful AI escapes human control. In a 1959 interview with the US writer Pearl Buck, Compton said he had approved the test after calculating the odds of a runaway fusion reaction to be 'slightly less' than one in three million. Tegmark said that AI firms should take responsibility for rigorously calculating whether Artificial Super Intelligence (ASI) – a term for a theoretical system that is superior to human intelligence in all aspects – will evade human control. 'The companies building super-intelligence need to also calculate the Compton constant, the probability that we will lose control over it,' he said. 'It's not enough to say 'we feel good about it'. They have to calculate the percentage.' Tegmark said a Compton constant consensus calculated by multiple companies would create the 'political will' to agree global safety regimes for AIs. Tegmark, a professor of physics and AI researcher at MIT, is also a co-founder of the Future of Life Institute, a non-profit that supports safe development of AI and published an open letter in 2023 calling for pause in building powerful AIs. The letter was signed by more than 33,000 people including Elon Musk – an early supporter of the institute – and Steve Wozniak, the co-founder of Apple. The letter, produced months after the release of ChatGPT launched a new era of AI development, warned that AI labs were locked in an 'out-of-control race' to deploy 'ever more powerful digital minds' that no one can 'understand, predict, or reliably control'. Tegmark spoke to the Guardian as a group of AI experts including tech industry professionals, representatives of state-backed safety bodies and academics drew up a new approach for developing AI safely. The Singapore Consensus on Global AI Safety Research Priorities report was produced by Tegmark, the world-leading computer scientist Yoshua Bengio and employees at leading AI companies such as OpenAI and Google DeepMind. It set out three broad areas to prioritise in AI safety research: developing methods to measure the impact of current and future AI systems; specifying how an AI should behave and designing a system to achieve that; and managing and controlling a system's behaviour. Referring to the report, Tegmark said the argument for safe development in AI had recovered its footing after the most recent governmental AI summit in Paris, when the US vice-president, JD Vance, said the AI future was 'not going to be won by hand-wringing about safety'. Tegmark said: 'It really feels the gloom from Paris has gone and international collaboration has come roaring back.'
