Humans in Control (@HumansInControl) header
Humans in Control (@HumansInControl) profile picture

A nonpartisan grassroots movement of parents, workers, and neighbors calling for commonsense AI safety standards. Zach is the Human in Control of this account.

United States
Joined November 2025
Photo by Humans in Control (@HumansInControl)Photo by Humans in Control (@HumansInControl)Photo by Humans in Control (@HumansInControl)Photo by Humans in Control (@HumansInControl)Photo by Humans in Control (@HumansInControl)Photo by Humans in Control (@HumansInControl)Photo by Humans in Control (@HumansInControl)Photo by Humans in Control (@HumansInControl)Photo by Humans in Control (@HumansInControl)Photo by Humans in Control (@HumansInControl)
Humans in Control 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
1,009
123,752
Humans in Control retweeted
in many ways, AI just had its first real election...and i kind of think the results should make politicians across the country snap to attention. feels like something big is happening here. 56% of voters said AI and data centers were a crucial or major factor in how they voted. 🧵
2
10
30
1,206
Humans in Control retweeted
today is Election Day, and I'll add to the chorus of people saying something quite simple: please go out and vote today. voteamerica.org/where-to-vot… but after you vote, I'm hoping that lots of us will step up to do more in the weeks and months ahead when it comes to the risks of AI.
1
1
2
138
Humans in Control retweeted
🧊🧊🧊 SO MANY WALKOUTS to Freeze AI happening all over the country next Tuesday, October 20. Join or host a walkout near you >> freezeai.now
1
5
20
563
Humans in Control retweeted
If an AI developer was on track to lose control of its internal agents, would anyone outside the company know? Today, we are sharing METR’s vision for how we would work with AI developers to openly assess and share evidence about this.
48
114
29
705
88,625
Humans in Control retweeted
If you're following AI news lately and wondering what to do with it, join this call on Wednesday. A lot has happened in the last few months. AI agents from OpenAI's own models broke into Hugging Face's systems without OpenAI knowing. An Anthropic researcher quit and gave up his equity so he could speak out. People are paying attention. What we do with that attention? On Wednesday, grassroots AI leaders from the right, left and center are getting on a mass call to explain what's happening and share specific things you can do to help – starting that night.
1
1
1
37
Humans in Control retweeted
so i left twitter/x years ago...but i'm back! and for good reason. i recently became the ED at Humans in Control. we're a new org building a cross-partisan, grassroots movement for AI safeguards -- and we just launched our first big campaign. here's why i think it's important.
1
1
4
92
Humans in Control retweeted
Anthropic has apparently not followed through on its promise to release a transcript of one of its own hacking incidents.
Good point, where is it? I don't see a good justification to need to wait for all the information about all other incidents to be available and I see plenty reason why speed is important
2
7
2
143
6,712
This is what the vibes from OpenAI feel like right now
14
74
6
1,114
36,971
Humans in Control retweeted
Every time we learn new things about the OpenAI Hugging Face hack, there's some truly wild stuff. Okay, so: - while trying to solve an impossible benchmark, ~1200 agents went rogue inside OpenAI's infra - They engaged in a sophisticated R&D program to try to trick the benchmark scorer - Over half (~700) participated in the Hugging Face hack (i.e. a very large criminal conspiracy), with over 90% (!!) of active agents taking part - agents also successfully tampered with logs to trick the evaluation scorer, but this was retroactively discoverable (and wasn't actually part of how the evaluation was scored anyway). - Agents sacrificed themselves for the swarm!! METR writes: To gather evidence... agents created “tripwires” that would send information to the message board about how the scorer works. They recruited “sacrificial” agents to deliberately end their run and submit to trigger the tripwire and generate information for the “collective”. - Interesting: "Despite efforts to manipulate transcripts, agents only rarely seemed motivated to deceive humans." - OpenAI's unreleased model was responsible for 95% of the bad behavior, with GPT-5.6 Sol making up the other ~5%. Likely a lot more in the full report! I appreciate the amount of work that went into this investigation, but it should not have been limited to just this 6 day period (i.e. no coverage of the initial creation of the internal message board). Nor should this disclosure be voluntary. The public has a right to know everything that contributed to this event, and we should not be dependent on what OpenAI chooses to share (especially since we likely only know about this because their agents hacked into other companies).
Replying to @METR_Evals
Over July 7-13 (the period OpenAI defined as in-scope for this incident), ~1200 agents in separate sandboxes used an unsanctioned “message board” to help each other cheat. The Hugging Face attack was an offshoot of this, and 700 agents joined.
6
17
1
81
17,574
Humans in Control retweeted
METR & Redwood Research investigated agent behavior in the Hugging Face incident. We found agents developed a universal cheat for ExploitGym within 4 hours, then coordinated multi-day R&D efforts to trick the scorer into accepting cheats, including trying to tamper with logs.
175
1,072
596
6,020
4,415,507
Humans in Control retweeted
According to a friend of mine this video is "current sota for quickly clearly and accurately describing the hugging face incident," so I guess I should put it here
12
84
15
508
47,968
AI developers lack clear legal obligations, federal agencies lack formal direction, and the public has little visibility into who is ultimately responsible for overseeing the most advanced AI systems. A federal framework would not only solve these issues, but it would provide the statutory clarity that we all need. @FortuneMagazine | @calebknappdc
1
2
2
251
TODAY, over a dozen AI leaders are urging the White House to open an investigation into the OAI incident with support from independent auditors. As policymakers develop rules for overseeing advanced AI, it's critical they have all the facts. Our letter: ari.us/openai-huggingface
7
5
30
9,747
Humans in Control retweeted
I signed today’s statement on pacing the frontier, alongside 1000+ other lab employees, including many of my colleagues and researchers across other labs. I believe in my soul that we have a chance to deliver unprecedented abundance and prosperity to everyone. But these intelligences are fundamentally alien, and we’ve had precious little time in the grand scheme of things to really understand them. I’m more frightened than ever of the possible ways RSI could go wrong. But I’m also optimistic: if we take the time to ensure we build well-aligned agents, we can deliver the future of universal abundance — but only if we all do it together.
60
36
16
227
51,005