{"id":4612,"date":"2026-09-16T14:06:48","date_gmt":"2026-09-16T14:06:48","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/replyguru.online\/?p=4612"},"modified":"2026-09-16T14:06:48","modified_gmt":"2026-09-16T14:06:48","slug":"a-brief-history-of-ai-executives-calling-for-regulation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/replyguru.online\/?p=4612","title":{"rendered":"A brief history of AI executives calling for regulation"},"content":{"rendered":"


\n<\/p>\n

\n
\n

Over the past few days, a lot of people who stand to make a lot of money from AI all publicly agreed that it\u2019s time to make everyone slow down before we lose control \u2014 including OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, Google DeepMind cofounder Demis Hassabis, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, and X CEO Elon Musk.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

When people who profit from something declare that it\u2019s dangerous and needs to be regulated, there\u2019s always reason to be skeptical. But whatever their reason, this is far from the first time AI thought leaders have sounded the alarm.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Charles Darwin\u2019s theory of evolution prompted author Samuel Butler to warn about intelligent self-replicating machines replacing humans back in 1863<\/em> \u2014 and in his follow-up 1872 book Erewhon<\/em>, he describes visiting a fictional society that has already regulated machines out of existence to avoid humanity\u2019s collapse. Computing pioneer Alan Turing famously warned in a 1951 lecture that artificial intelligence would \u201cmeet with great opposition,\u201d because undying machines \u201cwould not take long to outstrip our feeble powers\u201d and would eventually \u201ctake control.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Calls for intervention, too, aren\u2019t new. In 2000, Sun Microsystems cofounder and chief scientist Bill Joy wrote that self-replicating robots could be more dangerous than nuclear weapons, partly because they\u2019re being developed \u201cwithin the now-unchallenged system of global capitalism\u201d rather than in tightly controlled government labs. And in 2009, Microsoft researcher Eric Horvitz, who now serves as the company\u2019s chief scientific officer, brought leading AI researchers together to consider \u201ccreating policies that might constrain or bias the behaviors of autonomous and semi-autonomous systems so as to address concerns.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

But modern AI bigwigs warning that their investments should be controlled? That trend appears to have begun with Elon Musk, who invested earlier than most.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

July 2017<\/strong>: Elon Musk says we need to regulate AI before it becomes a danger to humanity<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n

By the time Elon Musk told a gathering of US governors that they needed to regulate AI right away, the SpaceX and Tesla CEO already had skin in the game. He\u2019d already invested $38 million in OpenAI, as well as stakes in at least two other AI companies, and he\u2019d publicly spoken about the dangers of AI for three years.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

In June 2014, he suggested AI research could produce a real-life Terminator, called AI \u201cpotentially more dangerous than nukes\u201d that August, and suggested that working on AI was \u201csummoning the demon\u201d that October. In January 2015, he joined Stephen Hawking in signing an open letter asking for responsible AI research; Hawking had previously warned that the creation of AI might be the last thing humans ever do.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

\u201cAI is a rare case where we need to be proactive about regulation instead of reactive. Because I think by the time we are reactive in AI regulation, it\u2019s too late,\u201d Musk told a gathering of US governors at the July 2017 National Governors Association summer meeting. In March 2018, he added: \u201cAI is far more dangerous than nukes. So why do we have no regulatory oversight?\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

March 2018: Mark Zuckerberg is \u2018actually not sure we shouldn\u2019t be regulated\u2019<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n

In the wake of Facebook\u2019s Cambridge Analytica data scandal, the Meta founder suggested his company should be regulated \u2014 if it\u2019s the \u201cright\u201d regulation. It was largely not about AI, but he did go there:<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

Now that companies increasingly over the next five to 10 years, as AI tools get better and better, will be able to proactively determine what might be offensive content or violate some rules, what therefore is the responsibility and legal responsibility of companies to do that?<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n

\n

In March 2019, he added that the internet needs a \u201cmore active role\u201d for regulators.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

December 2018: Microsoft sounds an alarm over facial recognition technology<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n

Earlier in 2018, Microsoft began taking fire for working with ICE on facial recognition technologies, at a time many tech CEOs had condemned Donald Trump\u2019s policy of separating children from parents who are arrested at the US border.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

While this form of AI isn\u2019t quite the same as self-replicating intelligence, Microsoft president Brad Smith opened the door to voluntary regulation in a speech at the Brookings Institution, saying, \u201cWe believe it\u2019s important for governments in 2019 to start adopting laws to regulate this technology. \u2026 We believe that the only way to protect against this race to the bottom is to build a floor of responsibility that supports healthy market competition. And a solid floor requires that we ensure that this technology, and the organizations that develop and use it, are governed by the rule of law.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

January 2020<\/strong>: Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai says there is \u2018no question\u2019 that AI needs to be regulated<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n

\u201c[T]here is no question in my mind that artificial intelligence needs to be regulated. It is too important not to,\u201d wrote Pichai in an editorial for the Financial Times<\/em>. \u201cThe only question is how to approach it.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

\u201cCompanies such as ours cannot just build promising new technology and let market forces decide how it will be used,\u201d he added. Like with Microsoft a year earlier, these comments emerged around fears about AI facial recognition specifically.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

March 2023<\/strong>: Elon Musk and top AI researchers call for pause on \u2018giant AI experiments\u2019<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n

In 2023, as generative AI fervor began to reshape the entire tech industry, scientists began suggesting that companies should slow down their research \u2014 or else.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

\u201cIf such a pause cannot be enacted quickly, governments should step in and institute a moratorium,\u201d the letter, published by the nonprofit Future of Life Institute and signed by Musk, among others, reads.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Two weeks later, Musk announced he\u2019d created his own new AI company. Two years later, he would use DOGE to dismantle chunks of the federal workforce instead of helping to regulate anything.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

May 16th, 2023<\/strong>: OpenAI CEO Sam Altman asks Congress to regulate AI<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n

Brought before the US Senate for a series of AI hearings, Altman agreed that Congress should create a new agency to regulate artificial intelligence. \u201cWe believe that the benefits of the tools we have deployed so far vastly outweigh the risks,\u201d he argued. \u201cHowever, we think that regulatory intervention by governments will be critical to mitigate the risks of increasingly powerful models.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

In another hearing on May 25th, Anthropic\u2019s CEO warned US senators that AI could help create bioweapons.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

May 25th, 2023<\/strong>: Microsoft president Brad Smith \u2018details five ways governments should consider policies, laws, and regulations around AI\u2019<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n

When OpenAI\u2019s CEO was before Congress, we noted that the tone was friendly and they seemed to be trying to shape legislation together; here is an example of Microsoft trying to shape future regulation as well.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

One regulatory example: \u201cNew laws would require operators of these systems to build safety brakes into high-risk AI systems by design. The government would then ensure that operators test high-risk systems regularly to make certain that the system safety measures are effective.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

May 30th, 2023<\/strong>: Top AI researchers and CEOs warn against \u2018risk of extinction\u2019 in 22-word statement<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n

\u201cMitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

While the 22-word statement doesn\u2019t explicitly ask the government to step in, it\u2019s hard to think world leaders wouldn\u2019t raise their eyebrows even higher than before. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and then-Google DeepMind CEO Demis Hassabis were among the cosigners.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

September 2023<\/strong>: Mark Zuckerberg wants everyone to \u2018work together\u2019 on regulation<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n

In a private Senate meeting, closed to the public and media, tech CEOs reportedly agreed that the AI industry needed regulation. One set of remarks was not so private: Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg said that \u201cCongress should engage with AI to support innovation and safeguards.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

\u201cWe think policymakers, academics, civil society, and industry should all work together to minimize the potential risks of this new technology, but also to maximize the potential benefits.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Between July 2023 and May 2024, tech companies signed a flurry of nonbinding agreements with governments that would supposedly keep them in check:<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
    \n
  • July 2023: Meta, Google, and OpenAI promise the White House they\u2019ll develop AI responsibly<\/span><\/li>\n
  • September 2023: More companies commit to the White House AI safety accord<\/span><\/li>\n
  • November 2023: At UK\u2019s AI Summit developers and govts agree on testing to help manage risks<\/span><\/li>\n
  • May 2024: AI Seoul Summit: World leaders agree to launch network of safety institutes<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n
    \n

    Also in September 2023: A book from Inflection AI CEO Mustafa Suleyman \u2014 who is now Microsoft\u2019s AI chief \u2014 argued that governments should regulate.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n
    \n

    August\u2013September 2024<\/strong>: Elon Musk and Anthropic come out in favor of California\u2019s AI safety bill<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
    \n

    \u201cThis is a tough call and will make some people upset, but, all things considered, I think California should probably pass the SB 1047 AI safety bill,\u201d Musk posted in August. Anthropic originally came out against it in July, as did OpenAI in August, but Anthropic changed its tune in September. California Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed SB 1047, though, stating that \u201cI do not believe this is the best approach to protecting the public from real threats posed by the technology.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n
    \n

    October 2024<\/strong>: Anthropic calls for \u2018targeted regulation\u2019<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
    \n

    \u201cGovernments should urgently take action on AI policy in the next eighteen months. The window for proactive risk prevention is closing fast<\/strong>,\u201d Anthropic wrote in an open letter (bolding theirs).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    \u201cIt is critical over the next year that policymakers, the AI industry, safety advocates, civil society, and lawmakers work together to develop an effective regulatory framework,\u201d the company added.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n
    \n

    January 2025<\/strong>: OpenAI submits its \u2018policy proposals\u2019<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
    \n

    The document begins by suggesting the UK stunted the development of its own automobile industry with regulation, while proposing \u201cdemocratic AI\u201d instead: \u201cRules and regulations for the development and use of AI should be based on the democratic values the country has always stood for.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n
    \n

    June 2025<\/strong>: Anthropic CEO: Don\u2019t let AI companies off the hook<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
    \n

    In a guest essay for The New York Times<\/em>, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei wrote: \u201cFederal law does not compel us or any other A.I. company to be transparent about our models\u2019 capabilities or to take any meaningful steps toward risk reduction. Some companies can simply choose not to.\u201d The essay is against the Trump administration\u2019s proposed 10-year moratorium on US states regulating AI.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    He wasn\u2019t arguing for a slowdown, though, but rather a \u201cnational transparency standard\u201d that \u201cwould help not only the public but also Congress understand how the technology is developing.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n
    \n

    September 2025<\/strong>: Anthropic endorses California\u2019s SB 53<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
    \n

    As California tried to regulate its AI giants again, Anthropic threw its support in early, and this one actually became law. It\u2019s a transparency standard, like the one Anthropic was asking for, with safety reporting requirements and whistleblower protection. OpenAI lobbied against it.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n
    \n

    September 2026<\/strong>: The AI industry seemingly agrees to slow down \u2014 while Trump calls AI fears \u2018a sick conspiracy\u2019<\/strong><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
    \n

    This summer, shit hit the fan. It became public that rogue AI agents can \u2014 and did \u2014 attack other companies. OpenAI said it hit the brakes in August, and on September 8th, a senior Anthropic safety researcher resigned in protest, declaring there\u2019s a 10 percent chance AI could kill all humans by the end of the decade. Another Anthropic safety researcher agreed.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    Now, suddenly, the AI industry has seemingly agreed to slow down the pace of development. More:<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    Is this a new call for regulation? From Anthropic\u2019s CEO, it seems to be. In his essay \u201cWe Must Pace the Frontier,\u201d Amodei writes that \u201cThe most effective method of pacing is via regulation that targets all US frontier AI companies, as that covers even those who are unwilling to cooperate voluntarily,\u201d and he suggests governments might embed people inside AI companies to help prevent incidents.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    It\u2019s not clear every AI company wants to go that far. \u201cWhere we will need the help of our government is for international coordination. But first we should do what we can ourselves,\u201d OpenAI CEO Sam Altman writes. But Altman does say that he\u2019ll commit to \u201cindependent evaluators with employee-like access\u201d as well.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    Meta\u2019s Mark Zuckerberg also doesn\u2019t seem to be aligned. On September 15th, he posted that each company has its own individual<\/em> responsibility to move at the right pace and that Meta is already doing so. He also prominently linked back to his manifesto from August, which contains this line: \u201cAny policy that slows American model releases — even by a month — could add significant risk to American leadership while letting foreign models race ahead.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    Regardless of what tech leaders are saying, regulation seems highly unlikely to come under the Trump administration, which has signaled it wants the industry barreling full speed ahead.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    Even if these companies don\u2019t actually want the regulation they seem to be asking for, this is one of the loudest alarm bells they\u2019ve sounded so far \u2014 and the world is watching.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    Follow topics and authors<\/strong> from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.<\/span><\/p>\n