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.
17 items scored in this window
- Meta continues to run ads promoting child sexual abuse material in India - report
- Anthropic researcher quits over AI labs ‘gambling with our lives’
- How a Blacklisted Chinese Tech Giant Kept Buying America’s Best A.I. Chips
- Six Chinese AI firms accused of aggressively copying US frontier models
- What OpenAI’s latest controversy tells us about the future of math
- Hugging Face co-founder: What we learnt from OpenAI’s hack
- Powering AI is an architecture problem
- An Alien Mind
- Anthropic withheld latest AI model from UK testing agency
- Beyond Training: A Feasibility Taxonomy for Inference-Time AI Governance
- Will China deploy humanoid robots to fight?
- Endorsement Without New Evidence: How Sequential Voting Inflates Mandates in Online Community Governance
- Should promotion depend on how workers use AI?
- California’s Governor to Sign Landmark Online Child Safety Bills
- China’s Regulators Take Aim at “AI Boyfriends”
- Labor wants Australians to be able to opt out of online algorithms. How will it change your feed?
- Democracy Needs Reach: Political Equality, Online Speech, and Algorithmic Recommendation
Across the whole window
The two tables below describe every item in the last 365 days under power-concentration. They are deliberately not narrowed by the reading filter, 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 |