How the monitored publications were assessed
Discourse valence across every scored item: what the sampled sources published and how independent models read it. It is not a measure of public opinion, not a measure of the state of the world, and article volume is not agreement.
The trend line needs at least two days of readings and there is one so far. It appears on its own once the pipeline has run across a second day. Today's readings are on the axis below.
This line is the mean of every item scored on each day. It deliberately ignores the reading filter, because a daily mean of only the adverse items would move with how many were filtered out rather than with the discourse.
21 items read as adverse
- Why this month's Microsoft patch release is a doozy
- AgentHijack: Visual Patch Attacks on Multimodal Computer-Use Agents
- Anthropic says it stopped scientists potentially developing bioweapons with AI
- More Anthropic researchers warn of AI’s perils as Musk terms fears a ‘psyop’
- Anthropic Researchers Raise Alarm Over A.I. Acceleration, Warning of Threat to Humanity
- Reading scores plummet as ‘digital distraction’ harms students
- What OpenAI’s latest controversy tells us about the future of math
- Could A.I. Really Kill All Humans?
- Hugging Face co-founder: What we learnt from OpenAI’s hack
- Beyond Right and Wrong: Evaluating Second-order Social Reasoning in Large Language Models
- OpenAI chief scientist warns no-one is prepared for consequences of AI
- Powering AI is an architecture problem
- An Alien Mind
- A Hacking Tool Built With A.I. Can Breach Phones Without a Click
- Anthropic withheld latest AI model from UK testing agency
- Beyond Training: A Feasibility Taxonomy for Inference-Time AI Governance
- Is AI about to produce explosive economic growth?
- The AI policy window is open. We need to act.
- Will China deploy humanoid robots to fight?
- Endorsement Without New Evidence: How Sequential Voting Inflates Mandates in Online Community Governance
- Total Simulated Survey Error: Designing and Diagnosing Survey Responses from Large Language Models
Across the whole window
The two tables below describe every item in the last 365 days. They are deliberately not narrowed by the reading filter (currently adverse), because a mean taken only over items already selected for their score would just restate the filter.
By topic
| Topic | Branch | Items | Mean | Position |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Existential and catastrophic risk | risk | 28 | -56 | |
| AGI and timelines | structural | 21 | -37 | |
| Loss of control and alignment | risk | 21 | -66 | |
| Governance and regulation | structural | 19 | -20 | |
| Concentration of power | risk | 17 | -37 | |
| Evaluation and measurement | structural | 10 | -22 | |
| Scaling and architecture | structural | 9 | -8 | |
| Cyber capability | risk | 8 | -56 | |
| Human agency and epistemics | risk | 7 | -22 | |
| Synthetic media and manipulation | risk | 6 | -63 | |
| Medicine and health | benefit | 5 | +0 | |
| Biological and chemical uplift | risk | 4 | -20 | |
| Scientific acceleration | benefit | 4 | +17 | |
| Abundance and material wellbeing | benefit | 2 | -8 | |
| Compute and infrastructure | structural | 2 | -13 | |
| Education and access to expertise | benefit | 2 | -37 | |
| Climate and energy | structural | 1 | -46 | |
| Employment and displacement | risk | 1 | -5 | |
| Productivity and growth | benefit | 1 | -26 |
By source
A source's mean says how the items it published were read. It is not a rating of the source.
| Source | Kind | Tier | Items | Mean |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Guardian: Artificial Intelligence | news | 1 | 9 | -55 |
| Financial Times: Artificial Intelligence | news | 1 | 8 | -53 |
| arXiv cs.CY (Computers and Society) | academic | 1 | 8 | -26 |
| The New York Times: Technology | news | 1 | 7 | -31 |
| BBC News: Technology | news | 1 | 6 | -36 |
| Ars Technica: AI | news | 1 | 5 | -73 |
| OpenAI | lab | 1 | 3 | -17 |
| IEEE Spectrum: AI | news | 1 | 3 | +2 |
| MIT Technology Review: AI | news | 1 | 2 | -50 |
| arXiv cs.AI | academic | 1 | 2 | -8 |
| The Economist: Science and Technology | news | 1 | 1 | -16 |
| Google DeepMind | lab | 1 | 1 | +7 |
| CSET, Georgetown | government | 1 | 1 | -22 |
| arXiv cs.LG (Machine Learning) | academic | 1 | 1 | +4 |