Pinned Tweet
Figuring how to determine legal responsibility for AI harms is one of our most urgent questions. Happy to share that my new paper on how U.S. negligence law should deal with liability for harms caused by autonomous AI agents has now been published by the Journal of Tort Law 😁
Cecil Yongo retweeted
A momentous day for London.
I’m so excited to see our plans to transform Oxford Street becoming a reality.
And this is just the beginning.
End of last week I was reading odes to Lula’s record and fight, and accepting the idea that the people had just, regrettably, moved on from him. Wonderful news today. Hopefully the universe will be kind enough to give us more of this in the years ahead 🤞
Cecil Yongo retweeted
There is absolutely no ceiling to how much I enjoy Man United failing. The limit does not exist. It will never, ever get old.
Awesome evening. Excellent presentation by @gathoni_ireri on the latest developments in AI capabilities, what they mean for risk, and what the policy response has been so far. And then I got a chance to chat with my old friends/ students. That was a special joy 🤗
Something about sharing spaces and conversations with high achievers. May the light always shine on the people who mentor and continuously believe in us.
@CecilYongo @ILINAProgram
Cecil Yongo retweeted
Something about sharing spaces and conversations with high achievers. May the light always shine on the people who mentor and continuously believe in us.
@CecilYongo @ILINAProgram
Inspirational, courageous, super admirable sorenmindermann.substack.com…
Cecil Yongo retweeted
Call for abstracts: “Disciplining AI.” Submissions due October 26, 2026, for an in-person symposium at @Harvard_Law on April 2, 2027.
Cecil Yongo retweeted
Finally overhauled my personal website, inspired by the beautiful Tufte CSS style
matthijsmaas.com/
Incl.
- overview of my academic work - matthijsmaas.com/publication…
- links, links, fresh hyperlinks
“The notation and language are unnatural, the reasoning is unclear; they are not the sorts of manuscripts that a self-respecting mathematician would release into the world” 🤔 theatlantic.com/technology/2…
More often than we admit, the most consequential thing some environments steal from us is our imagination
Cecil Yongo retweeted
With effective altruism in the news a lot more, I wrote about the version of EA I'm most excited about and the direction I'd like the movement to go. These 6 points are my vision of EA in a nutshell:
Insane. Outrageous. Huge love and respect for Sally Rooney. theguardian.com/uk-news/2026…
I stay respecting a backbone 🫡
Sally Rooney books withdrawn in UK over Palestine Action support bbc.in/4B82LFi
Two talks I’m excited to give soon:
- On what AI is going to do to legal doctrine (to Keele Law Society members)
- On how Africans can contribute to AI Safety (to the Effective Altruism South Africa community)
Cecil Yongo retweeted
Agree. Anthropic should have some kind of official policy about building bigger models than would be responsible
Anthropic's leaders need to stop commenting on the emergence of RSI like a local news anchor reporting on traffic on the 101, and acknowledge that they are the traffic, and they're not going to build something that they don't want to exist.
They should move beyond "pacing" language, commit to specific policies and red lines, explain why those lines are red, and then use that costly signal to build an international consensus around norms.
It's not that I trust the CCP, or that I think global lab monitoring and verification is imminent. But the status quo is absurd.
You've got US lab leaders writing (or favorably quote-tweeting) essays about slowing down while simultaneously saying "things are moving faster and faster" and "btw, our internal models finished mathematics on Tuesday, next up: physics."
The effect is the equivalent of Usain Bolt winning race after race while using his press conferences to bemoan the dangerous speed of modern sprinting on one's legs so would everybody please try a little less hard next race, and then ... breaking his 100m record again the following month. Honestly ask yourself: If you were China, why would you take this pausing/pacing stuff seriously?
Not sure how to feel about the fact that a research idea I toyed with for nearly 6 months was recently published, more or less the same way I conceptualized it, in the Harvard Law Review


















