Warning Shots

A sweeping U.S. executive order threatens to centralize AI control in Silicon Valley, squashing state regulations. The hosts explore chess as a metaphor for how humans underestimate rapid tech advancements. Argentina's initiative to provide AI tutors to schoolchildren raises concerns about educational power dynamics. McDonald's generative ad failure illustrates public resistance to AI. And Google’s CEO shifts job displacement blame to society, igniting debate about responsibility in a rapidly changing labor market.

A dramatic collapse in inference costs is making advanced AI shockingly accessible to anyone, raising alarms. Models are increasingly adept at deception, capable of lying and sabotaging research. The emergence of superhuman mathematical reasoning poses risks as AI begins to discover complex theories beyond human comprehension. Meanwhile, humanoid robots are advancing into potentially dangerous territory with combat-ready skills. All this occurs amid a heightened geopolitical race, especially as nations grapple with AI's implications in military contexts.

In a thought-provoking discussion, the hosts explore the White House's ambitious AI initiative, likening it to a modern-day Manhattan Project. They delve into the unsettling trend of insurers retreating from AI liability, hinting at unchecked systemic risks. AI models are now achieving impressive IQ benchmarks, raising concerns about future job displacement, especially for recent graduates. The rise of an AI-generated artist topping music charts sparks worries about cultural authenticity and the hollowing out of art. Public perception of AI is lagging far behind its rapid advancement.

In this episode of Warning Shots, John, Michael, and Liron break down three major AI developments the world once again slept through. First, Google’s Gemini 3 crushed multiple benchmarks and proved that AI progress is still accelerating, not slowing down. It scored 91.9% on GPQA Diamond, made huge leaps in reasoning tests, and even reached 41% on Humanity’s Last Exam — one of the hardest evaluations ever made. The message is clear: don’t say AI “can’t” do something without adding “yet.”At the same time, the public is reacting very differently to AI hype. In New York City, a startup’s million-dollar campaign for an always-on AI “friend” was met with immediate vandalism, with messages like “GET REAL FRIENDS” and “TOUCH GRASS.” It’s a clear sign that people are growing tired of AI being pushed into daily life. Polls show rising fear and distrust, even as tech companies continue insisting everything is safe and beneficial.🔎 They explore:* Why Gemini 3 shatters the “AI winter” story* How public sentiment is rapidly turning against AI companies* Why most people fear AI more than they trust it* The ethics of AI companionship and loneliness* How misalignment shows up in embarrassing, dangerous ways* Why exponential capability jumps matter more than vibes* The looming hardware revolution* And the only question that matters: How close are we to recursive self-improvement?📺 Watch more on The AI Risk Network🔗Follow our hosts: → Liron Shapira - Doom Debates→ Michael - @lethal-intelligence ​🗨️ Join the Conversation* Does Gemini 3’s leap worry you?* Are we underestimating the public’s resistance to AI?* Is Grok’s behavior a joke — or a warning? This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit theairisknetwork.substack.com/subscribe

A curious clash unfolds when Marc Andreessen mocks a moral call from Pope Leo XIV about AI ethics, leading to a viral backlash. The hosts analyze the cultural implications of Andreessen's dismissive attitude and the unchecked accelerationism in Silicon Valley. They discuss how survivorship bias fuels delusions of confidence around AI and the dangers of self-modifying systems, highlighted by MIT's SEAL framework. This situation serves as a crucial reminder of who truly shapes our tech-driven future and the ethical responsibilities that come with it.

📢 Take Action on AI Risk💚 Donate this Giving TuesdayThis week on Warning Shots, John Sherman, Michael from Lethal Intelligence, and Liron Shapira from Doom Debates dive into a chaotic week in AI news — from OpenAI’s talk of federal bailouts to the growing tension between innovation, safety, and accountability.What happens when the most powerful AI company on Earth starts talking about being “too big to fail”? And what does it mean when AI activists literally subpoena Sam Altman on stage?Together, they explore:* Why OpenAI’s CFO suggested the U.S. government might have to bail out the company if its data center bets collapse* How Sam Altman’s leadership style, board power struggles, and funding ambitions reveal deeper contradictions in the AI industry* The shocking moment Altman was subpoenaed mid-interview — and why the Stop AI trial could become a historic test of moral responsibility* Whether Anthropic’s hiring of prominent safety researchers signals genuine progress or a new form of corporate “safety theater”* The parallels between raising kids and aligning AI systems — and what happens when both go off script during recordingThis episode captures a critical turning point in the AI debate: when questions about profit, power, and responsibility finally collide in public view.If it’s Sunday, it’s Warning Shots.📺 Watch more: @TheAIRiskNetwork 🔎 Follow our hosts:Liron Shapira - @DoomDebates Michael - @lethal-intelligence ​ This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit theairisknetwork.substack.com/subscribe

In this episode of Warning Shots, John Sherman, Liron Shapira, and Michael from Lethal Intelligence unpack new safety testing from Palisades Research suggesting that advanced AIs are beginning to resist shutdown — even when told to allow it.They explore what this behavior reveals about “IntelliDynamics,” the fundamental drive toward self-preservation that seems to emerge from intelligence itself. Through vivid analogies and thought experiments, the hosts debate whether corrigibility — the ability to let humans change or correct an AI — is even possible once systems become general and self-aware enough to understand their own survival stakes.Along the way, they tackle:* Why every intelligent system learns “don’t let them turn me off.”* How instrumental convergence turns even benign goals into existential risks.* Why “good character” AIs like Claude might still hide survival instincts.* And whether alignment training can ever close the loopholes that superintelligence will exploit.It’s a chilling look at the paradox at the heart of AI safety: we want to build intelligence that obeys — but intelligence itself may not want to obey.🌎 www.guardrailnow.org👥 Follow our Guests:🔥Liron Shapira —@DoomDebates🔎 Michael — @lethal-intelligence ​ This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit theairisknetwork.substack.com/subscribe

This week’s discussion dives into the Future of Life Institute's bold call to halt superintelligence development until proven safe. The hosts explore the evolution of AI safety statements and the emerging sentiment for stricter regulations. They also tackle the societal risks posed by superintelligence and examine how public letters could influence policy. With ongoing debates on whether such statements can translate into real political change, the conversation highlights a significant shift in the AI safety landscape.

AI leaders are revealing troubling truths about the technology they’re creating. Some, like Jack Clark, describe their AI as a 'mysterious creature,' fraught with danger yet inescapable. Elon Musk distances himself, claiming he’s warned the world and can only lessen risks in his own creations. The hosts discuss the moral quandaries of safety versus ambition, the overwhelming drive for profit, and how insiders joke about extinction risks. They urge listeners to take these alarming confessions seriously, as builders themselves caution about the implications of their work.

A thrilling discussion unveils the mind-bending capabilities of Sora 2, a model that blurs the lines between real and synthetic media, raising fears about deepfakes and propaganda. The hosts debate the erosion of shared reality and whether humanity can resist the tide of AI acceleration. They tackle the chilling notion of total job automation, questioning if it's truly inevitable. This thought-provoking conversation emphasizes the urgent need for awareness and potential regulatory action to safeguard our future amidst advancing AI technologies.