mercredi 30 septembre 2026
RechercherExplore
Source trace. Via News points to the documents behind its reporting and shows what we drew from each — so you can check any claim. How we source
Source document

The U.S. Public Wants Regulation (or Prohibition) of Expert‑Level and Superhuman AI

View original at futureoflife.org
Future of Life Institute - Ai Safety Title: The U.S. Public Wants Regulation (or Prohibition) of Expert‑Level and Superhuman AI Date: 2025-10-19 19:08 Source: https://futureoflife.org/recent-news/americans-want-regulation-or-prohibition-of-superhuman-ai/ <p>A new national survey of 2,000 U.S…
Opening lines of the source · short snapshot — read the full document at the original

Ce que nous avons tiré de cette source

The claims Via News extracted from this document. We point to the source; we don't replace it.

  • A majority of adults (59%) have little or no confidence in US companies to develop and use AI responsibly.

    80% confidence
  • A majority of adults (57%) are not bought in to the development of expert-level AI under current conditions; 17% feel it should never be developed and 40% feel it should be halted until proven controllable and safe.

    80% confidence
  • Almost half (44%) of Americans think AI will do more harm than good, while only 38% think the opposite.

    80% confidence
  • Almost two-thirds (64%) of surveyed Americans feel that superhuman AI should not be developed until it is proven safe and controllable, or should never be developed.

    80% confidence
  • 69% of Americans think the government is not doing enough to regulate the use of AI.

    80% confidence
  • Only 5% of surveyed Americans support the status quo of fast, unregulated AI development.

    80% confidence
  • OpenAI, Anthropic, xAI, Google, Meta, and others have openly declared they are racing to expert-level or superhuman AI, while many actively hamper efforts to create meaningful guardrails.

    80% confidence
  • Two-thirds (64%) of surveyed adults would like to see an immediate pause on the development of advanced AI until the technology is proven to be safe.

    80% confidence
  • International scientific organizations ranked first among entities the public believes should determine the trajectory of advanced AI, with national government agencies a close second.

    80% confidence
  • Two-thirds of adults worry that advanced AI is likely (61% or greater chance) to cause significant harm to humanity if developed without proper safeguards.

    80% confidence
  • Three-quarters (74%) of adults are concerned about the possibility of AI resulting in the concentration of power in technology companies.

    80% confidence
  • 73% of surveyed Americans support slow, heavily regulated AI development, approximately matching the proportion wanting pharmaceutical-style regulation with extensive testing before deployment.

    80% confidence
  • 40% of Americans think AI will have a negative impact on society, and only 29% expect it to have a positive impact.

    80% confidence
  • AI companies and their leadership score significantly lower than scientific institutions in public trust for AI safety guidance.

    80% confidence
  • 49% of surveyed Americans expect superhuman AI to be developed within 5 years.

    80% confidence
  • Top reasons supporting development of advanced AI included solving major social and scientific challenges and creating abundance.

    80% confidence
  • Two-thirds (69%) of surveyed Americans trust AI researchers at universities and non-profits, and international bodies most for AI safety guidance.

    80% confidence
  • Around half of respondents expect that advanced AI will be developed quickly with minimal safeguards, despite not wanting this outcome.

    80% confidence
  • This is the first public large-scale survey specifically addressing U.S. public attitudes toward the development of advanced AI systems of the type referred to as AGI and superintelligence.

    80% confidence
  • One-third (37%) of adults are concerned that AI could cause the end of the human race on earth.

    80% confidence
  • Respondents with higher AI knowledge tend to appreciate both upsides and downsides of advanced AI and demand tighter safeguards.

    80% confidence
  • 49% of surveyed Americans think expert-level AI will be developed within 2 years.

    80% confidence
  • Top reasons cited for not developing advanced AI centered around human extinction or enfeeblement and concentration of power.

    80% confidence
  • There is a clear disconnect between the stated mission of leading AI companies and the wishes of the American public.

    80% confidence
  • There is overwhelming support (73%) for robust regulation on AI among surveyed Americans, with only 12% opposed to strong regulation.

    80% confidence
Ce que nous savons · l'intelligence derrière cette page
En direct du substrat
Ce que nous observons
The Agentic Takeover of the CFO's Office
Enterprise finance software vendors—BlackLine, OneStream, Numero AI, and Oracle—are racing to embed autonomous AI agents into core financial operations (close, consolidation, reporting), backed by consolidation M&A (Numero-Royu, BlackLine-WiseLayer), fresh leadership hires, and survey data showing nearly a quarter of CFOs plan to boost AI spending over 50%. Adoption momentum is strong even as at least one bellwether (Oracle) sees its stock lag year-to-date, suggesting the market hasn't yet fully priced in the shift from AI-as-feature to AI-as-agent in finance.
Notre lecture des données ›
Signaux que nous suivons
Satellite-Terrestrial Network Integration Acceleration
Increased investment and launches in hybrid satellite-cellular networks across telecom industry; competitive responses from other carriers; regulatory activity around satellite spectrum; expansion of emergency/rural connectivity use cases
Tendances que nous surveillons ›
Là où les sources divergent
Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC
Two significantly different EPS values (10.21 vs 2.68 USD_per_share) are reported for Morgan Stanley on the same observation date (2025-12-31). Fact A specifies FY 2025, while Fact B's 'N/A' fiscal period is ambiguous. If both represent FY 2025 annual EPS, these values directly conflict. The magnitude of the difference (3.8x) is too large to attribute to rounding or minor calculation variations. The missing fiscal period in Fact B raises data quality concerns, but same-date observation + same attribute should reference the same period.
Nous signalons les conflits ouvertement ›
Vérifié récemment
✓ Vérifié avec la source d'origine
4,984
faits reliés à leur source — et nous signalons ceux qui ne tiennent pas.
101 entités suivies4,984 faits vérifiés avec la source5,315 documents sources archivés
Interrogez ces données → isubstrate.com