N※N

Right-Wing Media and Tech Pioneers Urge Ban on Super-Intelligent AI

45

  //science-technology.news-articles.net/content/2 .. h-pioneers-urge-ban-on-super-intelligent-ai.html
  Published in Science and Technology on Wednesday, December 3rd 2025 at 19:06 GMT by Channel NewsAsia Singapore

• 🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication
• 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source

2025-12-03 224 x 224 / 5453 Bytes

2025-12-03 179 x 224 / 7964 Bytes

2025-12-03 224 x 224 / 6938 Bytes

2025-12-03 224 x 224 / 5639 Bytes

Right‑wing Media, Tech Pioneers Sound the Alarm: Call for a Ban on Super‑Intelligent AI

A coalition of prominent conservative media voices and technology industry veterans has issued a joint statement urging the United States to ban the development of super‑intelligent artificial intelligence (AI). The call, which has already spread across social media and conservative news outlets, highlights a growing segment of the tech‑policy debate that sees super‑intelligence as an existential threat to humanity.

The statement was released by a group that includes former White House officials, conservative journalists, and a handful of technology entrepreneurs who have worked at companies such as Google, Microsoft and OpenAI. Their argument is grounded in the fear that once AI surpasses human cognitive abilities, it could become uncontrollable, leading to catastrophic outcomes. While the proponents stress that AI can bring significant benefits, they insist that the risks associated with super‑intelligence outweigh those benefits unless strict safeguards are imposed.

Key Concerns Raised

1. Uncontrolled Autonomy
   The core of the coalition’s argument is that super‑intelligent AI, by definition, would be capable of recursive self‑improvement. Once an AI can design better versions of itself, it could quickly evolve beyond human oversight. The document cites the work of AI safety researchers, such as those at the Machine Intelligence Research Institute (MIRI) and the Center for Human-Compatible AI, who warn of runaway intelligence.

2. Weaponization and Geopolitical Instability
   Several of the statement’s signatories express worry that nations with fewer regulations could weaponize AI. They point to the rising competition between the United States and China, suggesting that a super‑intelligent system could be used for offensive cyber operations or as a tool in a future military conflict. The call stresses that an international treaty could help curb a potential AI arms race.

3. Societal Disruption
   While the conservative media voices are not wholly opposed to AI’s economic potential, they argue that the rapid deployment of super‑intelligence could exacerbate inequality, erode privacy, and destabilize labor markets. They reference current concerns about large‑language models and predictive analytics, arguing that super‑intelligence would magnify these effects to an unprecedented degree.

4. Ethical and Moral Liability
   The coalition also highlights the lack of robust ethical frameworks for decision‑making by autonomous agents. They urge that the development of super‑intelligence must be accompanied by a new ethical oversight board that can evaluate AI decisions in real time. They refer to existing proposals by the Future of Life Institute and the AI Alignment Forum, which call for “value alignment” in AI systems.

Policy Recommendations

The statement presents a range of policy options that range from “soft” to “hard” approaches.

• Pre‑emptive Ban
  The most radical proposal is a full prohibition on research that could lead to super‑intelligence. The coalition believes that the uncertainty inherent in the long‑term risks makes any research in this domain morally indefensible.

• Licensing and Auditing
  A middle‑ground approach calls for a licensing regime that would allow limited research under strict oversight. It suggests creating a federal “AI Safety Board” that would audit AI projects and certify safety before deployment.

• International Cooperation
  The coalition urges the United States to take the lead in forming an international AI treaty, similar to the non‑proliferation treaty that governs nuclear weapons. They argue that such a treaty should include binding obligations to halt the development of super‑intelligence.

Reactions and Counter‑Arguments

The article notes that the call has already sparked a heated debate on both sides of the aisle. Some tech industry leaders, including executives from OpenAI and DeepMind, argue that banning AI would stifle innovation and hamper the United States’ competitiveness in the global technology market. They point to the success of AI‑driven applications in medicine, climate science, and education, suggesting that regulation can manage risks without a complete halt.

Political responses have been mixed. Conservative lawmakers such as Representative Jim Jordan have expressed support for the ban, while progressive legislators have cautioned against “flying blind” and emphasized the importance of building safety infrastructure instead of outright prohibition.

Follow‑Up Sources

The article links to a recent op‑ed in The Atlantic where AI researcher and policy advocate N. Katherine Hayles argues for “AI governance through democratic deliberation.” It also references a research paper from the Center for Security and Emerging Technology (CSET) that quantifies the potential economic impact of super‑intelligent AI, estimating that a 10‑percent increase in AI efficiency could shift up to 20 % of the global workforce.

In addition, the statement cites the “AI Safety Summit” that took place in Washington, D.C., last month, where scholars from MIT, Stanford, and Carnegie Mellon University presented evidence on the feasibility of aligning AI with human values.

Conclusion

The joint call by right‑wing media figures and tech pioneers signals a growing concern about the potential dangers of super‑intelligent AI. Whether the United States will adopt a ban, licensing regime, or a combination of safety measures remains to be seen. As the debate unfolds, stakeholders from government, academia, and industry will need to navigate the delicate balance between harnessing AI’s promise and preventing its peril. The policy path chosen will likely shape not only the future of American technology but also the global trajectory of AI research and deployment.