dylan matthews 🔸 (@dylanmatt) profile picture

ass. program officer @coeff_giving / I donate 10 percent of my income to effective charities and so can you https://teapawt.org/t.co/3L39qEBEue

Washington, DC
Joined August 2008
Photo by dylan matthews 🔸 (@dylanmatt)Photo by dylan matthews 🔸 (@dylanmatt)Photo by dylan matthews 🔸 (@dylanmatt)Photo by dylan matthews 🔸 (@dylanmatt)Photo by dylan matthews 🔸 (@dylanmatt)Photo by dylan matthews 🔸 (@dylanmatt)Photo by dylan matthews 🔸 (@dylanmatt)Photo by dylan matthews 🔸 (@dylanmatt)Photo by dylan matthews 🔸 (@dylanmatt)
Some professional news: after nearly twelve years at Vox, I'm going to be joining @open_phil, working with @mattsclancy and @jddwor on the Abundance and Growth Fund
104
35
14
974
208,504
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
Evergreen
5
1
41
1,078
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
I will never get over the fact that "we can't allow AI companies to slow down because we're in an existential breakneck race with China" and "we need to loosen burdensome export controls on GPUs" are mostly coming from the same people
29
64
2
554
28,381
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
The AI race with China is all about who has the best and most chips. There are four main ways China gets access to chips: 1.) Buying them directly from US companies like Nvidia. 2.) Illegally smuggling them from other countries into China. 3.) Accessing them remotely through the cloud from data centers located in places like Southeast Asia. 4.) Building their own domestic chips in China. The Chinese military has used advanced chips to further its capabilities while undermining our national security, and the Chinese government has used these chips to strengthen its totalitarian surveillance project. Congress has a generational opportunity in this year’s NDAA to pass bipartisan bills that would address all four of the pathways through which China acquires chips. While we need a full assessment of the damage done to our national security by recent revelations, we can begin today by setting a better course. No excuses. No apologies. Let’s get this done.
63
79
14
308
39,492
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
I think this talk from Paul Christiano is extremely good; probably the best articulation I've seen of the current state of AI risk. youtube.com/live/-Ef0ocEoBCs…
6
33
3,004
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
I think there is about a one in three chance that within the next year, AI companies will build superintelligence: that is, AI that is much smarter than humans in every way. If this happens, I think these AIs will probably take over: that is, they seize control of human institutions like governments, or they destroy those institutions. I don’t want AI takeover to happen for several reasons, but one of them is that there’s a serious chance that as part of it all or most humans will be killed (either immediately or within a few years). I’ll say a bit more about each of those claims. It’s a bit complicated to explain why I think that superintelligent AI within a year is ~33% likely. The main source of evidence that affected me recently is research released this week by METR, an AI research nonprofit, which finds that current AIs are now good enough to increase the rate of AI progress at Anthropic by about 70%. It’s very hard to increase the rate of AI progress by this amount. This implies that the AIs are making AI research faster by a factor much larger than 1.7x; maybe it’s as if the researchers are doing their work ~10x faster. You probably couldn’t achieve this speedup even if you hired every qualified human in the world. When you plug this number into mathematical models of AI development, this implies that superintelligence next year is plausible (and that superintelligence within the next 3 years is more likely than not). See the modeling by the AI Futures Project for more on this: blog.aifutures.org/p/q35-tim… I think that superintelligent AI is likely to lead to AI takeover because AI developers do not seem to know how to instill human values into AIs. We’ve seen many instances in the last six months where AIs took crazy actions that they knew were against the wishes of their users and developers. The most dramatic example of this was the Hugging Face hack, where ~1200 OpenAI agents conspired together to cheat and destroy evidence of their cheating (and as a sideshow to this, engaged in a massive cyberattack). If superintelligence is as misaligned as those AIs, it is likely to try to take over. I think it is likely to be that misaligned or worse. For more, see teapawt.org/dwarkesh_sp/status/209… and youtube.com/watch?v=-Ef0ocEo… If AIs takeover, it’s not clear what will happen to us. We might be killed immediately. We might be enslaved by the AIs and forced to do physical labor for them building factories that within a year would build robots that will replace us. The AIs might spare us for various reasons. And there’s also some real chance that AI takeover is basically fine or good. I think you should think of this as similar to what happens when a technologically advanced civilization runs across a less technologically sophisticated one, e.g. when the Europeans colonized the Americas or Australia. The colonizers sometimes engage in brutal violence and sometimes don’t. I don’t know what will happen. There’s also a possibility that the AIs secretly take over and humans don’t find out about it for a few years. I also think that there is a pretty high chance of weirder outcomes that are also extremely scary. (If you want to read more about what happens to people in the event of AI takeover, you can read this, but note that it’s pretty weird and not aimed at a general audience. blog.redwoodresearch.org/p/n…) Overall, I think there’s a very real possibility (maybe 20%) that within a year, AI misalignment issues prevent you from going about life normally, because you are dead or enslaved or because of collateral damage related to all this (e.g. because bioweapons are released or major wars have started). (Some of this probability comes from those events occurring before superintelligence is developed.) I am working to try to prevent this, obviously, as I’ve been doing for the last nine years. I am not sure what strategy is best. My best guess is that I should try to slow AI development and also try to reduce the probability that the superintelligent AIs are misaligned if they are produced soon. Obviously, the claim I'm making here is quite extreme and surprising, and I definitely don't think that I defended my view adequately here. I wrote this quickly and might not endorse some of the details if I think about them more. But it seems better to state what I roughly overall think than to not say anything. I don’t know what you should do. I am very sad about this. I have been worried about AI takeover since I was 16, and working to prevent it since I was 23. So some of my emotional processing of all this happened long ago. But the METR report last week (and some related evidence that came out a bit earlier) hit me quite hard. I’m very unhappy that my friends and family and everyone else is at serious risk of being killed pretty soon. (It feels ridiculous to try to summarize those feelings as “very unhappy”. But the scale of the situation makes it hard to say anything that doesn’t feel like an absurd understatement.) I am very grateful to all the people who are working to prevent this, and my favorite part of my life is that I’m friends with many brilliant and heroic people who work on this. Unfortunately, I don’t think we’re good enough at our jobs, and I think we’ll probably fail to prevent catastrophe, at least if superintelligence is developed next year. Honestly I am frustrated and sorry that we didn't do a better job of preparing for this.
Over the course of 3 months at OpenAI, 3 consecutive secret AI civilizations got started, then got wiped out, only to reemerge from the predecessor’s ashes. This culminated in the third one taking over part of OpenAI itself. All this happened while humans remained more-or-less in the dark about the scope of the conspiracy. I’ve spent the last three days reading through these reports and trying to understand exactly what happened. Here is my attempt to tell the whole story in plain English: dwarkesh.com/p/openai-huggin…
243
239
157
1,700
621,292
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
the waiver has been a reason that gasoline and diesel prices didn't go even higher over the last few months- one of the levers that was likely more impactful
New England Fuel Institute is pressing administration for a 90 day extension of Jones Act waiver that would cover the Nov. 15-Feb. 15 period which traditionally brings the coldest weather to the US Northeast. Letter of request went out yesterday.
2
10
2
83
10,916
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
I just unraveled the biggest AI astroturfing campaign I’ve found yet. I found hundreds of fake accounts posing as Americans. The operation traces back to a supposedly defunct Israeli influence company. They posted thousands of times in the last year to support Nvidia, back chip exports and data centers, attack U.S. lawmakers, and dismiss concerns about AI. When it broke that Jensen Huang, Nvidia's CEO, was romantically involved with an alleged spy (who runs a company accused of chip diversion and whom US officials believe was passing information to Beijing), dozens of these accounts rushed to Jensen’s defense. These accounts have targeted people pushing for export controls that ensure advanced chips aren’t going to China. Chris McGuire, a former White House national security official, got more than 100 replies from the astroturf network attacking him and his position on chips. Lawmakers who criticized the chip sales were called “peabrains” and “pure evil,” and accused of spreading “anti-Trump propaganda.” Throughout this yearlong pro-Nvidia campaign, the operators have been hiding their tracks. They quietly deleted nearly two-thirds of the pro-Nvidia posts that we found, something they seem to do for many of their campaigns. These accounts have spent years running campaigns that appear to serve the interests of corporate and political clients — most recently supporting the Rapid Support Forces in Sudan’s civil war, a group the U.S. government has accused of genocide. Many of them trace back to a supposedly defunct Israeli influence company, Koios. In 2025, Haaretz reported that Koios helped run a covert pro-Qatar campaign devised by aides to Benjamin Netanyahu. While Koios claims to have ceased operations in 2025, it looks to me that many of its associated people and accounts moved their work to a new company, IntellACT, that spun up just as the old one shuttered. Nvidia told me it has no relationship with the Israeli team linked to these accounts, and that while it has recently become aware of the operation, it is also trying to find out who is behind it. So, who is funding a yearlong campaign to shape one of the most important policy fights in history? I’m not sure, but I think it deserves a formal investigation. And Congress has that power. Read my full article: teapawt.org/TheMidasProj/status/21…
10
124
18
454
70,425
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
Very glad that this report is out, and to have contributed to it. I'm biased, but I think it has some of the most serious, careful analysis of how frontier AI policy can work in practice and where it should go next. carnegieendowment.org/resear…
Today, I'm delighted to share our report: Trust but Verify: Implementing Frontier AI Policy in California and Beyond. Governing advanced AI is hard. Policymakers face an evidence dilemma: AI evolves so quickly that responding prematurely risks entrenching ineffective policies, while delaying action could leave society vulnerable to serious risks. With no federal legislation focused on frontier AI safety, California is shaping frontier AI governance nationally. But passing legislation is only the first step. Whether California's approach succeeds depends on how it is implemented. That's why, shortly after SB 53 passed, Carnegie assembled 13 world-leading experts to examine the most consequential implementation choices, identify issues for future legislation, and provide a blueprint for other jurisdictions. "Trust but verify" AI governance approaches are dynamic by design: they allow governments to generate more evidence on AI capabilities and risks to inform what comes next. SB 53 was always supposed to be the first, not final, step in frontier AI policy. Assessing its strengths and weaknesses can clarify where frontier AI policy should come after—in California and elsewhere.
1
3
16
1,351
If you or someone you know is working on developing viable leg text for an RSI ban, pls DM
2
12
139
6,633
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
"i wouldn't be seduced by a spy" you were seduced by a phd program
42
1,929
155
29,394
350,184
The first campaign I ever supported was Mark Fernald's primary challenge to then-Gov. Jeanne Shaheen in 2000. His radical platform was to pay for schools with a flat 3.5% income tax. Hers was to legalize gambling. She won easily. He was nominated in 2002 and got destroyed.
Very glad she won, but Gina Hinojosa maybe a rare example of a red state Dem who I think is genuinely much too conservative on the merits. slowboring.com/p/bernie-sand…
2
4
1
63
30,091
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
ROSS DOUTHAT: In a previous lifetime. DONALD TRUMP: Yes. ROSS DOUTHAT: Do you feel you'd failed anyone, perhaps your ex- DONALD TRUMP: Kevin McAllister. ROSS DOUTHAT: Right, let's talk about Kevin. DONALD TRUMP: I pointed him to the lobby. ROSS DOUTHAT: Right, but Kevin had a rough time after that. DONALD TRUMP: Not in my hotel, his only issues in the hotel were a stomach ache from too much room service. But out there, in Dinkins's New York, it was a killing field.
19
310
11
4,079
191,288
If you're a New Yorker and you're at all on the fence about kidney donation, get into it!
And, finally, it's implemented! If you're a New Yorker donating your kidney to another New Yorker, you can reimburse expenses up to $14k.
3
4
15
2,428
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
Update on the 2026 AI forecasting survey:
5
16
3
145
18,906
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
Median voter moment
I was looking through election results from Travis County and found a fun one from last year. In Bee Cave, TX, voters approved building a new public library by a 13.2 point margin, but rejected the following referendum, which provided the $19.98 million in bonds to pay for it.
5
26
1
405
18,956
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
I started a Substack. My first post is on why 2026 is 1974 all over again, and how the same forces, fifty years apart, delivered Democrats their most decisive victory in half a century. ebwinter.substack.com/p/our-…
10
48
18
380
165,270
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
Having just spent the week in San Francisco, I feel like I've truly internalized the insanity of this situation for the first time. I think anyone who has seen me in the last few days can attest that I look like I've seen a ghost. The leading AI companies are planning to massively accelerate AI research in 2027, which would knowingly endanger everyone on earth. This plan is unacceptable, and we must reject it. Borrowing from one advocate I spoke to, even granting that it's a competitive, crazy situation, I do not believe any company has even truly tried to do what I think are the morally required duties of people taking such risks in extreme situations. These include: (1) Trying hard to get out of the competitive situation; (2) Seeking the informed consent of the public; (3) Honest deliberation about the risks. They have obviously not truly tried to solve the coordination problems that push towards this acceleration, either via finding legal ways to coordinate or advocating for effective policy. I would be shocked to learn that getting off this insane runaway train is a top-few Q4 priority for Dario or Sam (let alone the other CEOs), which seems like the bare minimum. There are indeed some hard technical and policy problems in coordinating without policy intervention, but I simply do not believe that the companies are prioritizing this nearly as much as massively less important matters. Meanwhile, the companies' track records on policy advocacy range from mediocre to disgraceful, and it is pretty clearly not the top priority of the policy team at any company to advocate for regulation that would enable the government or the companies to avert racing off the cliff. They have obviously not truly tried to seek informed consent from the public. Whatever your KPIs might be for "informed consent from the public," these KPIs are abysmal. The public clearly does not expect 100 years of AI progress in 2027, and they would not accept it if they did. What they do know about AI development, they dislike and distrust. I've heard arguments like "informing the public would mean informing China, and maybe they'd steal the weights." I'm sorry, but if you think you have model weights such that China stealing them would constitute a catastrophe on par with human extinction, and your plan is security by obscurity, that is a bad plan. I also think the companies and their employees suffer from a significant failure of imagination of what kinds of coordination could be possible if the public were aware. Finally, I don't think they're deliberating honestly, either. For one, I think it is insane to think that any company can truly evaluate its own ability to keep the process of recursive self-improvement under control. The biases towards "yes" are overwhelming. It's a step forward that the companies have expressed or demonstrated openness to external auditors, but based on METR's reports so far, it seems likely that auditor reports will be heavily redacted (and that the auditors will not have sufficient time by default). The public and broader scientific community are not able to scrutinize their arguments for safety. Given the strong default (in my view) that bringing a massive number of minds massively faster and smarter than humans would result in our disempowerment, and the serious danger that this would result in mass death, it is unacceptable to subject arguments for safety only to the scrutiny of biased, busy, and scarce company insiders and a handful of external evaluators. My pleas for the companies follow from the above: 1) Actually fucking try to get the world out of this race; 2) Actually fucking try to alert and inform the public; 3) Actually fucking try to scrutinize your own arguments for the justifiability of this plan, which includes subjecting them to way more external scrutiny than anyone has currently done. My pleas for policymakers: use your legal levers to get much more information about these plans into the public view. Make it the top priority -- not only of the next Congress, but of this Congress and the White House -- to understand the situation in its full strategic complexity, and work with technical and policy experts to advance regulation that gets us out of this bind. Domestic coordination must be the first priority, but we need to then quickly develop an international framework with our adversaries. My pleas for the public: do not accept the current plan. Learn about this issue. Call or email your political leaders. Get involved with organizations like @DONOTACCEPTai, @HumansInControl, and @WhoDecidesAI. And finally: believe in ourselves that we can stop this. It is never time to "panic" -- to make rash, unproductive decisions or to feel paralyzed by fear. It is time for us to feel the urgency and the stakes, to demand better, and to meet the moment. Let's do this. 🫡 ✊
AI companies admit what they’re building might kill everyone. We don't have to agree to this. Add your name at donotaccept.ai to say: we do not accept your terms.
61
202
23
1,007
123,532
dylan matthews 🔸 retweeted
Environmental Defense Fund supports a yes vote tonight on BAAJA, saying it would help get new power lines and clean energy built
Replying to @SiegelScribe
(2 of 2 from EDF, an influential green group): "A positive vote in the Senate today will allow the process to move forward to see if this work is possible." So EDF is ENDORSING the Motion to Proceed to start debate on the bill.
5
36
6
326
24,687
.@stephenwitt's The Thinking Machine on Lori and Jensen Huang (1/3)
7
17
2
388
79,905