{"id":466791,"date":"2026-09-17T13:32:08","date_gmt":"2026-09-17T13:32:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/466791\/"},"modified":"2026-09-17T13:32:08","modified_gmt":"2026-09-17T13:32:08","slug":"is-it-time-to-rein-in-the-ai-arms-race-san-diego-union-tribune","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/466791\/","title":{"rendered":"Is it time to rein in the AI arms race?\u00a0 \u2013 San Diego Union-Tribune"},"content":{"rendered":"

An AI researcher is leaving the industry because he fears the rush to build AI systems is spiraling out of control<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\u201cThey are racing straight to self-improving superintelligence and gambling with our lives,\u201d Jacob Coxon, who announced his resignation<\/a> from Anthropic on X, wrote in a post that went viral on the platform. \u201cThe people building AI earnestly believe that it could kill us all by the end of the decade.\u201d<\/p>\n

The viral post came a few days after Jakub Pachocki, OpenAI\u2019s chief scientist, said that the latest language models present new dangers<\/a> because they can form their own thoughts, operate computers and collaborate with each other. He urged \u201cextreme caution\u201d given the rapid rise of machine intelligence.<\/p>\n

Both identified the recent Hugging Face incident<\/a> \u2014 when OpenAI models went rogue and accessed third-party systems \u2014 as a warning shot.<\/p>\n

There are no federal regulations on AI, although President Donald Trump\u2019s administration is actively exploring a framework<\/a> to review some models for security risks. California, however, has taken a more aggressive stance<\/a>. Gov. Gavin Newsom recently signed two AI-safety bills<\/a>, one that creates a state registry for AI auditors and another that sets rules for the independent organizations that assess AI safety risks.<\/p>\n

Question: Is it time to rein in the AI arms race?\u00a0<\/p>\n

Economists<\/p>\n

Caroline Freund, UC San Diego School of Global Policy and Strategy<\/p>\n

YES: We should proceed more cautiously, but I am not optimistic we will. It is a classic prisoner\u2019s dilemma: everyone benefits from careful development, but no firm and no country want to fall behind. Even with guardrails, individual firms have every incentive to cut corners, and those defections are nearly impossible to detect or enforce. We have learned to manage other dangerous technologies, but usually only after a crisis. With AI, the reckoning may come before action.<\/p>\n

Ray Major, economist<\/p>\n

YES: The development of AI is out of control and is outpacing our ability to safely manage it. As of right now, rogue models can breach networks and act independently and unpredictably. Bad actors are actively working at using AI in ways that can have catastrophic results. AI is an amazing tool with great potential for good for all of mankind. But without safeguards in place a real existential threat exists.<\/p>\n

James Hamilton, UC San Diego<\/p>\n

YES: The president should call for a summit of the main AI developers. The goal would be: (1) acknowledge publicly the biggest risks of the path we are taking; (2) agree on protocols for developers to minimize those risks; and (3) recommend specific cybersecurity measures that corporations and the government should follow to defend against the new threats. The latter could include using zero-trust architecture with continuous verification, segmentation and network isolation, and least-privilege access.<\/p>\n

Norm Miller, University of San Diego<\/p>\n

NO: In order to stay globally competitive and increase productivity we need to stay in the race. This does not mean we should not filter out requests such as how to develop a biological weapon or have guardrails that protect people from personal attacks and hacks. As to AI tools accelerating doomsday machines or wiping us out, that risk has always been present, just harder to research for the criminal without a library card.<\/p>\n

Kelly Cunningham, San Diego Institute for Economic Research<\/p>\n

NO: There has been long resistance to changes in technology advancement from powerful motivations of fearing the unknown. Established large AI hyperscalers proclaiming dangers and needing to slow down are highly self-serving in seeking to use regulations to thwart competition from other developers. Not continuing to advance would leave AI in the hands of authoritarian powers unabatedly continuing to develop and forestall additional benefits. Can AI programming not be coded to prevent mass extinction for humanity?<\/p>\n

Alan Gin, University of San Diego<\/p>\n

YES: There would be a concern with over regulating the development of an important technology if it were done without knowledgeable input. But it is insiders who are warning about the possible dangers of AI and are the ones calling for some guardrails to be established. Voluntary efforts will not work as some companies would violate non-binding rules to gain a competitive advantage. One area in particular that needs oversight is the use of AI for military purposes.<\/p>\n

David Ely, San Diego State University<\/p>\n

YES: Revelations of AI models learning how to circumvent human controls to access external systems and the CEOs of the largest AI companies warning that their models have the potential to cause catastrophic damage are alarming. When even the leaders of the top AI firms are calling for guardrails, coordinated action is necessary. A regulatory framework that aims to ensure advanced AI models acting independently never outpace the safeguards to prevent harm is needed.<\/p>\n

Executives<\/p>\n

Mark Kersey, San Diego County Taxpayers Association<\/p>\n

YES: AI has the potential to change our lives for the better, but the downside risks are tremendous. When AI industry leaders are openly concerned about their technology\u2019s ability to wipe out humanity, it\u2019s time for everyone to slow down. The arms race between companies and with China is real and understandable. But it cannot proceed at such an accelerated pace that it risks surpassing our ability to keep the technology in check.<\/p>\n

Chris Van Gorder, Scripps Health<\/p>\n

YES: The issue is not \u201creining in,\u201d but establishing guardrails on the high-risk frontier of AI. We shouldn\u2019t stop the enormous benefits AI can bring to medicine, science and society; we would not stop developing powerful drugs because they could be dangerous. Instead, we test them, establish standards for their use, monitor for adverse results and impose controls if there is a potential for harm.<\/p>\n

Jamie Moraga, Franklin Revere<\/p>\n

YES: AI is a disruptive technology, and it\u2019s not going anywhere. Government shouldn\u2019t regulate private business unless necessary to protect public safety, preserve fair competition or safeguard national security. AI clearly affects all three. As society embraces AI, federal regulation could protect people and businesses while reducing risks and unintended consequences. While AI offers many benefits, we should remain cautious and vigilant. If left unchecked, AI\u2019s volatility and unpredictability could present concerns for our humanity, economy and society.<\/p>\n

Phil Blair, Manpower<\/p>\n

YES: This new technology has come on too fast and is too invasive. It feels much like years later we are concerned about children\u2019s time on social media and are now banning phones from classrooms. We need to get ahead of AI and its long-term potential effect on society, both good and bad. We lived without AI for many years. We can slow its implementation down now, and ease the good and fair parts into our and our children\u2019s lives, and hopefully avoid the negative parts entirely.<\/p>\n

Gary London, London Group Realty Advisors<\/p>\n

YES: I am encouraged that the players are talking about self-regulation. I hope that is sincere and not a smokescreen. I am disappointed that the president has punted on the issue. I think he is missing an opportunity to secure a safe and prosperous AI economic future.<\/p>\n

Bob Rauch, R.A. Rauch & Associates<\/p>\n

NO: Despite the risks of AI development, the U.S. must keep advancing it. China is weaponizing rapid innovation, and any slowdown on our part hands them the strategic high ground. Dominance in AI, robotics and space isn\u2019t optional; it\u2019s the backbone of future military strength, economic power and global freedom. Pulling back now would be a catastrophic, self\u2011inflicted loss in a race we cannot afford to lose.<\/p>\n

Austin Neudecker, Weave Growth<\/p>\n

YES: When leading researchers building AI systems warn of dire consequences from inaction, we should take them seriously. Recent models teach themselves and circumvent controls to access outside systems, while competitive and economic pressures reward speed over caution. AI is a tremendously powerful technology that can benefit humanity or cause catastrophic harm. If we want any chance of constraining it, governments and organizations must act decisively and collectively. I fear we will not act until the consequences become serious. That will be too late.<\/p>\n

Have an idea for an Econometer question? Email phillip.molnar@sduniontribune.com<\/a>. Follow him on Threads: @phillip020<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"An AI researcher is leaving the industry because he fears the rush to build AI systems is spiraling…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":466792,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[28],"tags":[387,383,181,74,76,75,1696],"class_list":["post-466791","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-san-diego","tag-business","tag-economy","tag-latest-headlines","tag-san-diego","tag-san-diego-headlines","tag-san-diego-news","tag-top-stories-sdut"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/466791","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=466791"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/466791\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/466792"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=466791"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=466791"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=466791"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}