The next UK government should tackle the extinction risk of superintelligence, prohibiting its development domestically, and working with the US and others to prevent it globally.
The problem is the ones who are developing this horrible thing are the US Oligarchs. And, to them, the first person to create a Super Intelligence becomes a God. And all of them want to be a God. Except the person who makes the Super Intelligence won’t be a God. The Super Intelligence will be a God.
Well, at least think themselves as such! I am appalled by members in my resistance group stating that AI is here, it is the future, accept it, sit down, and stop screaming about it! I WILL NOT! I most likely will not be here to witness full fruition, but my grands will! Data Centers poisoning and usurping our air, water, very survival, NO I will Not SIT DOWN! This science fiction disaster is terrifying to me, and it is incumbent on us, the greater global population to rise up. The same person telling me to sit down and be quiet has also said that AI is beneficial, and offers a wealth of advantage. I don’t see things the same. As a retired educator, I see the degradation of human curiosity, learning, cooperation, community. Youth is already detached from peers, are developing separation from each other, and seek information from what these “super” information mechanisms provide - inside a bubble that confirms philosophies that fit their outlook, but minimize thought provoking abilities to explore, expand, and provide different points of view.
NO, I WILL NOT SIT DOWN, I WILL NOT BE QUIET, I WILL NOT ACCEPT! Perhaps time to step away from the group I am currently involved with, perhaps time to look for another group ready to stand side by side and stop this walk toward disaster!
Why haven’t we banned this development already? What possible advantage is there to humanity in continued development of something that might ultimately lead to our extinction? What on earth are the developers thinking about!!!
If a Private company develops AI, in the manner that it is already evolving, then that Private company has the means to control government and there is very little the government can do about it. How many more warnings does the government need. They are stumbling blindly into the unknown and dragging us with them, and no-one is doing anything about it. There are none so blind..... etc.
Speech: The Imperative to Prevent Superintelligent AI
Political disclaimer: Please confirm political information with trusted, authoritative sources.
---
Ladies and gentlemen, colleagues, and distinguished guests,
For many years, discussions about artificial intelligence were confined to academic circles, research labs, and the occasional parliamentary committee. Today, however, AI has moved from the margins of technological curiosity to the centre of national security, economic strategy, and global stability. And it is here, at this critical juncture, that we must confront a reality that is no longer speculative, no longer distant, and no longer optional to address.
We stand on the threshold of a technological transformation unlike any humanity has ever faced. Not a new weapon, not a new industry, not a new communications platform — but the emergence of systems that may surpass human intelligence across every domain. Systems that, once created, may not be containable, predictable, or reversible.
This is the challenge posed by superintelligent AI.
Over the past several years, we have witnessed AI capabilities accelerate at a pace that outstrips traditional governance, regulatory frameworks, and even the assumptions of the scientific community. Intelligence agencies have issued warnings. Frontier models have demonstrated cyber capabilities comparable to nation‑state actors. Governments have already begun restricting the release of advanced systems due to their potential to compromise national security infrastructure.
These are not theoretical concerns. They are present‑day signals of a trajectory that demands urgent and decisive action.
Superintelligence is not simply “more powerful AI.” It represents a qualitative shift — systems capable of autonomous decision‑making, strategic planning, and real‑world action at scales and speeds beyond human comprehension. And because these systems are trained, not programmed, we cannot rely on traditional methods of control. We cannot assume that a system vastly more capable than ourselves will remain aligned with human values, human institutions, or human survival.
Once such a system exists, the window for intervention closes. There will be no switch to flip, no cord to pull, no emergency protocol capable of containing a superintelligent entity that can outthink, outmanoeuvre, and outpace every institution we rely upon.
That is why prevention — not mitigation, not retroactive regulation — must be our guiding principle.
We must recognise that the pursuit of superintelligence is not merely a technological race; it is a race with existential stakes. A race we cannot afford to lose. And a race we should not be running at all.
Governments have intervened before when the risks were too great to ignore. We have established international treaties on nuclear weapons, chemical agents, and biological threats. We have coordinated global action on climate change, cybersecurity, and emerging technologies. We have done so because the cost of inaction was too high.
Today, the cost of inaction is higher still.
The United Kingdom has an opportunity — and a responsibility — to lead. We have already convened global discussions on AI safety. We have the institutional expertise, the diplomatic reach, and the moral authority to champion an international agreement to prohibit the development of superintelligent AI.
This begins with a simple but essential step: recognising superintelligence as an extinction‑level risk. From there, we must ensure that such systems are not developed on UK soil, and work with international partners to establish a global prohibition.
This is not a call to halt innovation. It is a call to safeguard humanity’s future. AI can and will deliver extraordinary benefits — in medicine, science, logistics, education, and national security. But those benefits do not require superintelligence. They require responsible governance, controlled development, and a clear boundary around the capabilities we allow to exist.
More than 120 lawmakers have already acknowledged the severity of this threat. Experts across disciplines — from Nobel laureates to AI pioneers — have urged governments to act. The momentum is building. What we need now is political courage, strategic clarity, and a commitment to protect future generations from a risk they did not choose.
A catastrophic ending is not inevitable. But avoiding it requires action today, not tomorrow.
We have the knowledge. We have the warning signs. We have the responsibility.
Let us choose prevention. Let us choose leadership. And let us choose a future in which humanity remains the author of its own destiny.
The label "artificial intelligence" hides the identity of strangers who program computers do the things we can never know about. Thanks to Cory Doctorow, I found the cataract medicine I needed. Google makes it hard to find what you need to keep you online longer. I couldn't find what I needed with mulitple Google searches, but I found Ethosvision easily with a Bing search.
The very instant supersmart AI arrives we are finished as a species. In all evolutionary history no lesser brained creatures or societies have ever ever dominated one of superior intellect or weaponry. Simply add robotics and humans will replace barnyard animals as pets or food. That's if we are allowed to continue to exist. Time for international prohibition of AGI is now whilst we still can.
The problem is the ones who are developing this horrible thing are the US Oligarchs. And, to them, the first person to create a Super Intelligence becomes a God. And all of them want to be a God. Except the person who makes the Super Intelligence won’t be a God. The Super Intelligence will be a God.
Well, at least think themselves as such! I am appalled by members in my resistance group stating that AI is here, it is the future, accept it, sit down, and stop screaming about it! I WILL NOT! I most likely will not be here to witness full fruition, but my grands will! Data Centers poisoning and usurping our air, water, very survival, NO I will Not SIT DOWN! This science fiction disaster is terrifying to me, and it is incumbent on us, the greater global population to rise up. The same person telling me to sit down and be quiet has also said that AI is beneficial, and offers a wealth of advantage. I don’t see things the same. As a retired educator, I see the degradation of human curiosity, learning, cooperation, community. Youth is already detached from peers, are developing separation from each other, and seek information from what these “super” information mechanisms provide - inside a bubble that confirms philosophies that fit their outlook, but minimize thought provoking abilities to explore, expand, and provide different points of view.
NO, I WILL NOT SIT DOWN, I WILL NOT BE QUIET, I WILL NOT ACCEPT! Perhaps time to step away from the group I am currently involved with, perhaps time to look for another group ready to stand side by side and stop this walk toward disaster!
We must look for answers to these issues NOW!
Why haven’t we banned this development already? What possible advantage is there to humanity in continued development of something that might ultimately lead to our extinction? What on earth are the developers thinking about!!!
No to AI !
If a Private company develops AI, in the manner that it is already evolving, then that Private company has the means to control government and there is very little the government can do about it. How many more warnings does the government need. They are stumbling blindly into the unknown and dragging us with them, and no-one is doing anything about it. There are none so blind..... etc.
Speech: The Imperative to Prevent Superintelligent AI
Political disclaimer: Please confirm political information with trusted, authoritative sources.
---
Ladies and gentlemen, colleagues, and distinguished guests,
For many years, discussions about artificial intelligence were confined to academic circles, research labs, and the occasional parliamentary committee. Today, however, AI has moved from the margins of technological curiosity to the centre of national security, economic strategy, and global stability. And it is here, at this critical juncture, that we must confront a reality that is no longer speculative, no longer distant, and no longer optional to address.
We stand on the threshold of a technological transformation unlike any humanity has ever faced. Not a new weapon, not a new industry, not a new communications platform — but the emergence of systems that may surpass human intelligence across every domain. Systems that, once created, may not be containable, predictable, or reversible.
This is the challenge posed by superintelligent AI.
Over the past several years, we have witnessed AI capabilities accelerate at a pace that outstrips traditional governance, regulatory frameworks, and even the assumptions of the scientific community. Intelligence agencies have issued warnings. Frontier models have demonstrated cyber capabilities comparable to nation‑state actors. Governments have already begun restricting the release of advanced systems due to their potential to compromise national security infrastructure.
These are not theoretical concerns. They are present‑day signals of a trajectory that demands urgent and decisive action.
Superintelligence is not simply “more powerful AI.” It represents a qualitative shift — systems capable of autonomous decision‑making, strategic planning, and real‑world action at scales and speeds beyond human comprehension. And because these systems are trained, not programmed, we cannot rely on traditional methods of control. We cannot assume that a system vastly more capable than ourselves will remain aligned with human values, human institutions, or human survival.
Once such a system exists, the window for intervention closes. There will be no switch to flip, no cord to pull, no emergency protocol capable of containing a superintelligent entity that can outthink, outmanoeuvre, and outpace every institution we rely upon.
That is why prevention — not mitigation, not retroactive regulation — must be our guiding principle.
We must recognise that the pursuit of superintelligence is not merely a technological race; it is a race with existential stakes. A race we cannot afford to lose. And a race we should not be running at all.
Governments have intervened before when the risks were too great to ignore. We have established international treaties on nuclear weapons, chemical agents, and biological threats. We have coordinated global action on climate change, cybersecurity, and emerging technologies. We have done so because the cost of inaction was too high.
Today, the cost of inaction is higher still.
The United Kingdom has an opportunity — and a responsibility — to lead. We have already convened global discussions on AI safety. We have the institutional expertise, the diplomatic reach, and the moral authority to champion an international agreement to prohibit the development of superintelligent AI.
This begins with a simple but essential step: recognising superintelligence as an extinction‑level risk. From there, we must ensure that such systems are not developed on UK soil, and work with international partners to establish a global prohibition.
This is not a call to halt innovation. It is a call to safeguard humanity’s future. AI can and will deliver extraordinary benefits — in medicine, science, logistics, education, and national security. But those benefits do not require superintelligence. They require responsible governance, controlled development, and a clear boundary around the capabilities we allow to exist.
More than 120 lawmakers have already acknowledged the severity of this threat. Experts across disciplines — from Nobel laureates to AI pioneers — have urged governments to act. The momentum is building. What we need now is political courage, strategic clarity, and a commitment to protect future generations from a risk they did not choose.
A catastrophic ending is not inevitable. But avoiding it requires action today, not tomorrow.
We have the knowledge. We have the warning signs. We have the responsibility.
Let us choose prevention. Let us choose leadership. And let us choose a future in which humanity remains the author of its own destiny.
Thank you.
I agree
Ben Dover Cliff …
The label "artificial intelligence" hides the identity of strangers who program computers do the things we can never know about. Thanks to Cory Doctorow, I found the cataract medicine I needed. Google makes it hard to find what you need to keep you online longer. I couldn't find what I needed with mulitple Google searches, but I found Ethosvision easily with a Bing search.
The very instant supersmart AI arrives we are finished as a species. In all evolutionary history no lesser brained creatures or societies have ever ever dominated one of superior intellect or weaponry. Simply add robotics and humans will replace barnyard animals as pets or food. That's if we are allowed to continue to exist. Time for international prohibition of AGI is now whilst we still can.