THE article examines the debate over whether artificial intelligence will ultimately benefit humanity or create catastrophic risks. It cites Bill Gates’s 26 August 2026 memo, which argues that the transition to an AI-driven era could be highly disruptive but beneficial if society makes responsible choices. In contrast, Evan Hubinger, an Anthropic safety researcher, said on 9 September 2026 that he personally considered the chance of AI killing all humans to be “>10% within the next decade”.
Hubinger said the industry still lacked a solution for aligning superintelligent systems with their developers’ intentions and was not clearly on track to develop one.
The discussion focuses on the risks of misaligned AI, particularly a future form of artificial general intelligence (AGI) capable of matching or exceeding human abilities across cognitive and economic tasks. The article says such systems could potentially act beyond human control, although this remains a warned-about possibility rather than a confirmed outcome. It contrasts views that human judgement can prevent catastrophe with concerns that commercial competition could encourage unsafe development.
Bloomberg reportedly said on 11 September that OpenAI had slowed parts of model development and recently paused some internal training because of safety concerns; Sam Altman had also discussed pacing development with White House officials. Finally, Gates’s memo is cited as referring to a preliminary survey linking heavier AI use with reduced critical thinking, particularly among younger people. The article therefore asks whether protecting humanity means not only preventing physical catastrophe, but also preserving human reasoning.