162 responses so far. More uniform spread than I expected. Only 4 have been right (slightly worse than random chance).

Just saw this new paper. It was already known that models from Stability and Alibaba dominate the image & video NCII ecosystems, respectively, but I didn't know they were *this* dominant. Just a few socially reckless companies are the principal enablers of AI NCII abuse.

Lennart Finke and I will release a paper on Monday about how some AI developers tend to make models that differentially downplay company controversies. Below (🧵) is a link to a 1-question Google form for you to guess the results before they're out. (They might surprise you.)

I decided to make an unpolished, public, living Google Doc with notes on projects I might be interested in. (Also now linked on my website.) docs.google.com/document/d/...

I am starting an AI governance ICML megachat on Signal. DM me if you'd like the link to join.

I just gave Bernie's AI Wealth Fund Act a close read. The wealth redistribution via this Act would be enormous. But it does something else far more impactful... 🧵Here's what it does, plus 3 things I'd change -- one of which I think, if unaddressed, could be a fatal flaw.

Yes, countries CAN cooperate on AI cyber risks. Countries like China and the US love to constantly cyberattack each other. Because of this, I have heard a few people (under Chatham House rules) speculate that cyberdefense is an AI risk domain in which international cooperation is unlikely...

Our fight is for Adam Raine, his parents, Maria and Matt; and for every family and every kid.

If I were Anthropic, I would honestly be overjoyed at the Trump admin blocking Fable. - It's probably temporary - It's free publicity - It distinguishes Anthropic w.r.t. other companies - People want what they can't have - The admin doesn't have much credibility anyway

Here, Kristy Loke and I discuss why open-weight models offer a surprisingly extraordinary opportunity for collaboration between the US and China on AI risk. ✅ Alignment ✅ Incentive ✅ Means www.thewirechina.com/2026/06/14/t...

A generationally important US House primary for AI and tech policy is happening on June 23 in New York's 12th district. If you live in NY-12, and if you believe that AI safeguards, transparency, and accountability are critical, I hope you consider voting for @alexbores.nyc (D).

Now that I have your attention by posting this spinning point cloud GIF, I'd like to propose a litmus test for AI mechanistic interpretability research. You might call it the "interp hammer" test...🧵

Glad to join Doom Debates with Liron! And yes -- if I could press a button and stop research on "superalignment", "scalable alignment", and "scalable oversight" research, I would. (I might even do it for mechinterp too.) www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XV...

Here's my PhD thesis defense from 5 weeks ago. This link exists, so I thought I might as well share. drive.google.com/file/d/1Zs9...

There are really interesting academic questions emerging around AI and epistemic risks. I only fear that, by the time we reach consensus, we will be too dumb to understand it. Thanks to Mick, Jonathan, et al!

Anthropic and OpenAI are publicly pointing out how having the option to slow down AI would offer a potentially critical form of optionality in the future. The correct response for any policymaker should be "Damn, this is serious. How can I help build that capacity?"

According to the MIT Libraries' database of theses (dating back to the 1800s), my thesis was only the 2nd in the institute's history to contain the word "shit."

Sometimes I run into old papers or books that I can't believe weren't written about AI today.

Dean Weinstein's leadership on AI and belief that it is today's most pressing governance challenge is one of the reasons why I am glad to join HKS and why I think it will be a unique source of academic leadership in AI governance. www.hks.harvard.edu/faculty-res...

Just finished my PhD at @MITCSAIL. In July, I'll start as an assistant professor at the @harvard.edu @harvardkennedy.bsky.social. I have lots to learn and lots to do. With others (some TBA 👀) at HKS, I'm looking forward to helping academia offer guidance for governing the next chapters of AI.

As a personal exercise, I drafted a proposal for how I would amend section 230 -- it would only apply to platforms that are small or have open-source recommendation algs. (This passes the Wikipedia test.) Note: I'm not the first person to have this idea. Just sharing for fun.

Thank-yous from my PhD thesis defense earlier this month.

@michelleding.bsky.social, @kamachee.bsky.social, Rui-Jie Yew, and I made an annotated bibliography compiling academic/journalistic work about the mechanics of the AI NCII ecosystem and the roles that companies play in it. It's public. Check it out if you'd like! docs.google.com/document/d/1...

I recently finished preparing a 90-minute crash course presentation on [technical] AI governance, where we're at in 2026, and the different ways that things might change in the next few years. Let me know if you want me to give it sometime or share slides.

🧵🧵🧵 At this point, I think it's only reasonable to fully expect some sort of major and unpleasant AI-caused economic disruption and popular backlash in the next year or two. I'm just not sure which kind.

I just added to my personal website that "I never have and never will work for big tech, and I have never signed a non-disparagement agreement." stephencasper.com/

I really liked this video: youtu.be/UgDEyQ1h-EA...

In practice, almost all AI porn is, in a certain morally relevant sense, not completely consensual. I was glad to talk briefly about this with Jessica Klein while she was writing this new MIT Technology Review piece!

As an AC for the ICML Technical AI Governance Research workshop, I am noticing a trend. A LOT of papers have the word "increasingly" in the first sentence of the abstract. 🙃

🧵It is hard to overstate how disappointing I think this new paper from Oxford, OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google (et al) is. I can't take it seriously as academic work, just as propaganda. It also has some very bad scholarship and questionable adherence to research ethics.

Governing AI is kind of like grief: 1. Denial -- "...next token prediction...stochastic parrots..." 2. Anger -- "Elon did WHAT?!" 3. Bargaining -- "Maybe Newsom will sign a watered-down bill." 4. Depression -- "Oh, this is what Collingridge was talking about." 5. Acceptance -- :/

When talking about AI and its future, I wish it were more of a faux pas to make vague appeals to the benefits of technological progress -- and I don't just mean "AI curing cancer". Technological progress in general probably isn't as good as we normally think it is.

A recent (short) talk of mine is now up on YouTube. It is about why, if you are working for an AI company on making its systems safer, I think you should consider quitting. www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ugu7...

🚨 One week left to submit your AI-gov-related research to the TAIGR workshop.

Now that Mythos is released, we can start the clock. I'd bet that within 9 months, a system with comparable cyber capabilities will be widely available (either open-weight or openly served). Hopefully, we just have enough time to improve cyberdefense enough to be ready.

Now that Mythos is released, we can start the clock. I'd bet that within 9 months, a system with comparable cyber capabilities will be widely available (either open-weight or openly served). Hopefully, we just have enough time to improve cyberdefense enough to be ready.

🧵🧵🧵 A provocation to the mechanistic interpretability researchers of the world...

Me in December: "Wow, freedom of information laws are awesome. I can't wait to get info." Me now: Enters my 4th month of getting bullied and gaslit by 3 governments at once. Anyway, if you need to do US FOIA, UK FOI, or EU FOIA requests, let me know -- I have advice.

Reasons to submit to the ICML Technical AI Gov. Research (TAIGR) workshop: - 8-page limit - Broad scope, AI gov-related - Workshops don't trigger dual submission policies - Best paper awards both overall and by category - Great community - Cool stickers Deadline April 24!

OpenReview for the #TAIGR workshop for #ICML on technical AI governance research is live as of today. (Not an April Fools joke). See the call and link to OpenReview here: taigr-workshop.com

I wish more CS papers had tables of contents. Makes them much more navigable. I think one reason it's rare is that submission venues have page limits. So there's often just not room. I wish venues would conditionally relax length requirements by the length of an optional ToC.

Today, I realized that, taken together, Appendices 3.2, 3.3, and 3.5 of the EU AI Act Codes of Practice *unambiguously* require open-weight model developers to let external evaluators conduct adversarial fine-tuning evals on their frontier models. Good.

Could social media make us less polarized instead of more? We tested 5 algorithms on 3 platforms with 10,000 people for 6 months during the 2024 election, and found that the answer is yes. 🧵

Just like we have mass school shootings, we now also have mass school AI non-consensual nudifications.

Announcing the technical AI Governance Research (TAIGR) ICML workshop in July! Submissions (up to 8 pages) are due April 24. Co-submission with ICML and NeurIPS is encouraged. taigr-workshop.com

Do you do technical AI research? In this talk, I argue that you 🫵 should see yourself quite literally as a type of policymaker. Thanks @far.ai. www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ekp...

The official text isn't out yet & will matter a lot. But Europe may be moving to treat AI nudification similarly to how pirated media or CSAM is treated: as something that, even though it will always be available, can possibly be made much less accessible. www.politico.eu/article/eu-g...

Using a well-timed screenshot and my phone's cache, I was able to recover some of the since-deleted tweet from Jeremy Lewin, where he admitted that the government sees the new OpenAI contract language as just "memorializing" a vague "commitment" rather than drawing any real new lines.

As someone who is not a fan of @anthropic.com...I think you should use Claude.

We almost certainly won't make AI safe by making safe AI. Others are still going to create unsafe AI. – @scasper.bsky.social at #IASEAI2026 Open-Weight AI Risk Management Workshop I led one of the discussion groups and we had some nice new ideas of how to make open weight models safe 😊