Introduction: The Era of Ubiquitous Artificial Intelligence Products
The rapid rise and widespread adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies, particularly generative AI based on large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT, Copilot, and Gemini, has sparked a diverse spectrum of opinions about AI’s ultimate impact on humanity. From visions of AI transforming the world with “astounding triumphs” to warnings of an impending AI bubble about to burst, to even the most severe anxieties about “superintelligent” AI that could pose existential threats, the conversation is complex and charged with both hope and fear.
The Existential Risk Warning from a Leading Figure
Among the voices raising alarm is Geoffrey Hinton, often called the “godfather of AI,” a Nobel laureate whose recent statements have captured widespread attention. Hinton estimates there is a 10 to 20 percent chance that AI could lead to human extinction within the next 30 years. This provocative prediction has prompted serious reflection both inside and outside AI research communities. Yet, despite Hinton’s dire warning, there is no consensus on whether such an extreme outcome is likely or even how it would unfold.
Expert Perspectives on AI and Existential Risk
To clarify this pressing question, five experts working at the forefront of AI research and ethics shared their perspectives on whether AI poses an existential risk.
Near-Term Risks vs. Existential Threats
Aaron J. Snoswell, Senior Research Fellow in AI Accountability at the Queensland University of Technology, approaches the topic from the standpoint of governance and oversight. He emphasizes the importance of focusing on near-term risks and ethical AI deployment rather than getting caught up in speculative dystopias. According to Snoswell, while AI systems do pose serious challenges—such as bias, misinformation, and privacy concerns—these problems are addressable through responsible innovation combined with strong regulation.
Human Control and AI Alignment
Niusha Shafiabady, Associate Professor in Computational Intelligence at Australian Catholic University, highlights the nuanced dependencies between AI capabilities and human decision-making. She notes that existential risk scenarios often rely on assumptions about uncontrollable AI behavior, but these ignore the fact that humans remain central in shaping AI’s goals, alignment, and deployment. Shafiabady urges more research on AI transparency and controllability to reduce risk from powerful autonomous systems.
Ethical and Social Considerations
Sarah Vivienne Bentley, a Research Scientist focused on Responsible Innovation at CSIRO’s Data61, underlines the significance of socio-technical contexts in assessing AI risks. She points out that societal structures, policymaking processes, and public engagement all influence the ultimate consequences of AI. Bentley advocates a multi-disciplinary response that integrates technical safety research with social sciences to ensure AI benefits society without endangering it.
Current AI Capabilities and Optimism
Seyedali Mirjalili, Professor of Artificial Intelligence at Torrens University Australia, offers a cautiously optimistic view. He acknowledges AI’s transformative potential but stresses that the current generation of AI is far from the autonomous superintelligence described in worst-case scenarios. Mirjalili supports investing heavily in AI safety research while promoting transparent and collaborative international governance frameworks.
Balancing Precaution and Progress
Simon Coghlan, Senior Lecturer in Digital Ethics and Deputy Director of the Centre for Artificial Intelligence and Digital Ethics at The University of Melbourne, provides a balanced ethical lens. He warns against both complacency and alarmism. Coghlan stresses the ethical imperative to prepare for low-probability but high-impact risks while also addressing the more immediate human rights challenges posed by AI. His perspective highlights the need for inclusive dialogue involving diverse stakeholders to co-create AI futures that respect human dignity.
Consensus and the Path Forward
Interestingly, three out of these five experts concluded that Artificial Intelligence does not currently, or imminently, pose an existential risk. Instead, they emphasize the importance of nuanced, evidence-based policy, robust safety research, and participatory governance to navigate AI’s challenges safely. The remaining two experts acknowledge the possibility but call for augmented precautionary measures grounded in scientific rigor.
Conclusion: Thoughtful Governance for AI’s Future
While AI’s rapid evolution has raised compelling existential questions, expert opinions reflect varied assessments rather than uniform alarm. The consensus leans towards urgent but pragmatic actions—strengthening AI accountability, enhancing system transparency, advancing safety measures, and fostering collaboration across disciplines and borders. This balanced approach offers hope that, with foresight and responsibility, the human-Artificial Intelligence partnership can realize remarkable benefits without succumbing to existential threats.
Ongoing expert and public engagement will be crucial to chart a safe and ethical course for humanity’s technological future.
Read this article on NDTV
