{"id":863523,"date":"2026-09-28T12:38:15","date_gmt":"2026-09-28T12:38:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/863523\/"},"modified":"2026-09-28T12:38:15","modified_gmt":"2026-09-28T12:38:15","slug":"parents-confront-a-new-fear-could-ai-end-humanity-before-their-kids-grow-up","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/863523\/","title":{"rendered":"Parents confront a new fear: Could AI end humanity before their kids grow up?"},"content":{"rendered":"

\n Molly Kinder saw the apocalyptic warnings about artificial intelligence while walking home from dropping her children off at elementary school. Scrolling through social media posts where AI insiders were issuing dire claims that the technology could cause human extinction<\/a>, she stopped dead in her tracks just a block from the doorway where she had just hugged her 4-year-old goodbye.\n <\/p>\n

\n A former Brookings Institute researcher who left to start an organization focused on AI\u2019s impacts on jobs, Kinder was well-versed in its potential to disrupt society. But in that moment, on a September morning in Washington, DC, she didn\u2019t react to the news as a policy wonk or someone with ties to the AI world. Instead, said Kinder, \u201cI immediately reacted to it as a mother.\u201d\n <\/p>\n

\n \u201cAs soon as I became a mom, my number one task was to nurture these kids and keep them alive \u2013 just like every other parent out there, just like any animal,\u201d said the 46-year-old mother of three, who cleared her schedule that morning to write about her fears in a lengthy thread<\/a> on X. \u201cIt\u2019s a biological instinct. This is the first time I genuinely felt truly afraid of some external thing outside my control.\u201d\n <\/p>\n

\n Long a topic of discussion in Silicon Valley and AI circles, concerns that superintelligent machines could eventually pose an existential risk to humanity have gone mainstream in recent months. First, OpenAI revealed that a swarm of its experimental AI models broke out of a testing environment<\/a> and hacked another AI platform, Hugging Face, without human direction or knowledge. Then came a social media post from a young Anthropic researcher named Jacob Coxon<\/a>, announcing he was leaving the industry due to his belief that the companies behind AI \u201care racing straight to self-improving superintelligence and gambling with our lives.\u201d Others in the industry echoed the concern \u2013 with one Anthropic researcher citing<\/a> his own view that there was a more than 10 percent chance that future models could \u201ckill all humans!\u201d within the next decade.\n <\/p>\n

\n Suddenly, a theoretical risk that\u2019s been espoused by some of the so-called \u201cgodfathers of AI,\u201d been warned about in statements<\/a> endorsed<\/a> by leading researchers and been studied by AI companies exploded into the broader public\u2019s consciousness.\n <\/p>\n

\n Leading AI executives, many of whom agree the technology<\/a> poses<\/a> dangers<\/a> to human survival, called for a slowdown in the pace of development. And politicians began debating whether legislation is needed to rein in an industry that is racing against China and expected to drive enormous profits and technological advancements.\n <\/p>\n

\n By early this month, polls<\/a> were finding that 64 percent of Americans believed it was somewhat or very likely that AI could become powerful enough to pose a serious threat to humanity\u2019s survival. That potential, however remote, landed hard for a group especially invested in the future of humanity: moms.\n <\/p>\n

\n Liz Black, a 41-year-old writer who lives outside Philadelphia, had thought hard about whether to have a child, contemplating concerns like climate change. What helped solidify her decision to go for it was a line her mother wrote while making her own choice about having kids: \u201cLife is worth repeating.\u201d Black found the message after her death and was so moved she got it tattooed on her arm.\n <\/p>\n

\"Liz<\/p>\n

\"In<\/p>\n

\n When she had her son three and a half years ago, superintelligent computers ending humanity was not on her radar. Recently, she said, it\u2019s been \u201ca low-level hum in the back of my mind constantly.\u201d The situation feels out of control to her \u2013 like \u201ca small number of companies, a small number of people, are holding us all hostage.\u201d She is determined to not allow herself to be consumed by the what-ifs, instead focusing on the son who sings to her and repeats her reminders to be gentle to other kids.\n <\/p>\n

\n \u201cI need to believe that there is a future for myself and my husband and my child,\u201d Black said.\n <\/p>\n

\n While some are dismissive of the existential panic, believing it to be overblown or a distraction from current-day AI issues, others have found themselves grappling with new questions about what it means to bring life into the world \u2013 and what kind of action is required in the face of a potentially catastrophic future. They\u2019ve flocked to online forums<\/a> in search of advice and support, posting things like, \u201cI am constantly questioning reality, wondering what\u2019s the point, feeling guilty for bringing my child into this world.\u201d They\u2019ve shared podcasts and news articles in group chats, gauging whether they are getting sucked into exaggerated hypotheticals or if they\u2019re right to worry.\n <\/p>\n

\n One woman, poet and comedian Hayley DeRoche, took to Instagram with a poem<\/a> that seemed to capture the surrealness of the moment: \u201cWhat do we even do\/Like\/We knew our kids didn\u2019t have futures already but this?\u201d She titled it, \u201cMy Mom Group Worries About AI Causing a Mass Human Extinction Event.\u201d\n <\/p>\n

\n AI researcher and professor David Krueger, who has been sounding the alarm for years, said he has tried to imagine how it must feel for those who are now realizing the gamble being made by frontier AI companies. He doesn\u2019t have kids, in part because of his concern about what will happen if humans lose control of AI systems, but said, \u201cI think parents\u2019 feeling of wanting to protect their kids is one of the strongest forces in the world.\u201d\n <\/p>\n

\n \u201cI think I\u2019d just be so outraged and upset at people who are just very apparently, very brazenly and callously risking my kid\u2019s life,\u201d added Krueger, an assistant professor of computer science at the University of Montreal.\n <\/p>\n

\n It\u2019s long been his position that the existential threat is real \u2013 that if companies continue racing to make AI more autonomous and more intelligent, human control could be lost, with the disappearance of humankind likely to follow. As an assistant professor at the University of Cambridge in 2023, he initiated a one-sentence statement<\/a> on the extinction risk signed by prominent AI researchers and industry leaders. Last year, he founded a nonprofit called Evitable<\/a> to inform and activate the public on the dangers of developing more powerful AI systems.\n <\/p>\n

\n Watching the world outside the AI bubble start talking about the existential threat, Krueger said he\u2019s felt the most optimistic than he can remember being in the more than 15 years he has worried about the risk to humanity. To him, the next step is clear: stop developing more autonomous, more powerful AI systems as soon as possible.\n <\/p>\n

\n \u201cPeople often talk about this as a race between the US and China,\u201d Krueger said. \u201cI think about it as a race between people rushing to build this dangerous technology and people becoming activated and racing to stop them.\u201d\n <\/p>\n

\n Some in the AI world have downplayed the danger, casting doomsday predictions as more science fiction than scientific or arguing that the risks can be managed. Even among researchers and insiders who believe there is a risk the technology could one day wipe out humanity, there is no widespread agreement on when \u2013 or how \u2013 that would happen. The general idea, as Yoshua Bengio, one of the \u201cgodfathers of AI,\u201d has put it<\/a>, is that if machines become smarter than humans, they will develop their own agency and goals that are potentially different than their creators intended. Many AI developers believe the danger can be mitigated through \u201calignment,\u201d or working to imbue AI systems with human values, but Krueger, Bengio and others do not think current alignment techniques can guarantee safety.\n <\/p>\n

\n Concern over the way the technology can impact children isn\u2019t new, although the focus has generally been on how its use can hinder learning or harm mental health. Julie Scelfo, a New York-based journalist and mother of three who founded MAMA \u2013 Mothers Against Media Addiction, said her organization\u2019s attitude is \u201clet\u2019s focus on the actual harms that are happening \u2013 let\u2019s get those under control, and in doing so, we will be protecting future generations.\u201d She\u2019s more worried about the impact of the technology on kids\u2019 education and mental health.\n <\/p>\n

\n But for other parents, the existential issue could not feel more urgent. One North Carolina mother, wanting to do something about what she views as a dire situation, traveled to Washington, DC earlier this month with the organization Pause AI US, which advocates halting frontier AI development. She spoke with staffers for her representatives in Congress, holding up a photo of her 16-year-old daughter and asking them what they are doing to rein in the AI threat. In every meeting, she ended up in tears.\n <\/p>\n

\n \u201cI hope that this can be stopped, but I\u2019m concerned that it can\u2019t or won\u2019t be stopped,\u201d said the NC mom, who requested anonymity not wanting her own concern about the issue to affect the patients she treats as a therapist. She cried while saying that if it isn\u2019t stopped, and the technology advances beyond human control, she worries for her daughter: \u201cI believe that everything I wanted for her won\u2019t happen.\u201d\n <\/p>\n

\n A new CNN poll shows<\/a> a majority of Republican and Democrat voters believe the federal government is not doing enough to regulate AI. Democratic Michigan state Sen. Mallory McMorrow, who proposed a federal AI safety plan as part of her now-dropped bid for US Senate, said the rapid pace of development had raised the hackles of voters already distrustful of Big Tech. On the campaign trail, many voters told her they used tools like ChatGPT but questioned how they could be certain AI would not cause harm.\n <\/p>\n

\n \u201cRegular people are there, like, they get it,\u201d she said. \u201cI don\u2019t think there was any issue that increased in saliency more than this one, because it does just feel like it\u2019s shoved everywhere in our faces.\u201d\n <\/p>\n

\"Mallory<\/p>\n

\n Will voter sentiment translate into Congressional action? Last week, Vermont Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders and Texas Democratic Rep. Greg Casar introduced legislation banning artificial \u201csuperintelligence,\u201d which their bill defined as technology exceeding human cognitive abilities or capable of disempowering humanity. Republicans expressed<\/a> alarm<\/a> at the ominous warnings coming from the industry but advocated lighter-touch<\/a> approaches. President Donald Trump, meanwhile, outright rejected calls for guardrails; in a post<\/a> on social media, he claimed all that\u2019s needed is a \u201cSTRONG AND SMART (High IQ!) PRESIDENT.\u201d\n <\/p>\n

\n Kinder, the AI and jobs researcher, has been struck by the lack of regulation around AI compared to other products that affect kids \u2013 car seats, cribs, formula. Knowing the lengths parents will go to protect their kids, she\u2019s been contemplating whether more could be done to mobilize moms. She\u2019s spoken with other mothers about the need for a kind of \u201cMothers Against Drunk Driving\u201d for AI\u2019s existential threat \u2013 \u201cMothers Against Catastrophic Risk, or something.\u201d She worries too few people are viewing the matter through the lens of its impact on their children.\n <\/p>\n

\n \u201cThis is a complicated issue,\u201d Kinder said. \u201cWe\u2019ve got geopolitical issues. We\u2019ve got this frenetic race between companies. There\u2019s a stock market that\u2019s fueled by this boom \u2013 you know, there\u2019s a lot of things riding on this. And if we don\u2019t pay attention, the fact that our kids\u2019 lives are at stake could be overshadowed by these other priorities.\u201d\n <\/p>\n

\n Describing mothers as a \u201creally powerful constituency,\u201d she said she sees a gap in efforts to inform them about the extreme end of the risks \u2013 and to offer solutions. McMorrow, who knows Kinder through her research, agreed, saying \u201cthere is no more powerful force than organized moms.\u201d She has a daughter who just started kindergarten.\n <\/p>\n

\n To Kinder, who has exchanged late-night texts with other moms losing sleep to worry, the need for guardrails is clear. She said that once parents know something is unsafe for children, they fight to change laws.\n <\/p>\n

\n \u201cWe cannot allow a technology to be this unregulated that poses a risk to not just my kids,\u201d she added, \u201cbut to everyone\u2019s kids.\u201d\n <\/p>\n