# ai-ethics 343 Published articles for ai-ethics 343. This is one page of public article previews, not the complete archive. Follow Next page to continue. Summaries are not the original full articles. ## Mustafa Suleyman argues against treating AI models as sentient or entitled to rights DevFeed: [Mustafa Suleyman argues against treating AI models as sentient or entitled to rights]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Author: Simon Willison Published: 2026-09-16T16:00:54Z Content type: opinion Language: en Sources: [Simon Willison's Weblog]() Topics: [Artificial Intelligence](), [Generative AI](), [Large Language Model](), [Microsoft]() Tags: [ai](), [ai-2-236](), [ai-ethics](), [ai-ethics-343](), [ethics](), [generative-ai](), [generative-ai-1-982](), [llms](), [llms-1-948](), [microsoft](), [microsoft-134]() ### AI overview The article quotes Mustafa Suleyman arguing that AI models should not be treated as having feelings, preferences, rights, or entitlement to human welfare. He says the evidence does not justify granting models such rights and warns that doing so could make AI containment and alignment more difficult. ### Source excerpt We should not treat models as though they have feelings, preferences, rights, or any entitlement to our welfare. Consciousness is the foundation of our ethical, legal, and political systems. To invite another entity to share any flavor of these rights isn't justified by the evidence and will make the AI containment and alignment challenge even harder. -- Mustafa Suleyman, A warning about 'model welfare' Tags: ai-ethics, generative-ai, ai, microsoft, llms ## The contagion of fear DevFeed: [The contagion of fear]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Author: Simon Willison Published: 2026-09-14T21:18:13Z Content type: opinion Language: en Sources: [Simon Willison's Weblog]() Topics: [anthropic](), [Artificial Intelligence](), [trust](), [Large Language Model]() Tags: [ai](), [ai-2-236](), [ai-ethics](), [ai-ethics-343](), [anthropic](), [anthropic-336](), [bryan-cantrill](), [bryan-cantrill-13](), [ethics](), [trust]() ### AI overview Bryan Cantrill argues that sweeping claims about AI causing catastrophic harm rely on vague extrapolation, including unsupported references to critical infrastructure and bioweapons. The article calls on domain experts to make alarmist claims more carefully and avoid abusing public trust. ### Source excerpt The contagion of fear Bryan Cantrill responds to the tweet by former Anthropic employee Jacob Coxon confirming that many Anthropic researchers believe AI "could kill us all by the end of the decade". Bryan shares a story of his own youthful mistakes causing unjustified panic among less technical peers, and warns against doing the same: These ghoulish claims strike brazenly at the hearth, and given the obvious importance of AI, it is unsurprising that they have leapt into the mainstream, with people asking the natural question: how would that happen? The answers always rely on hand-wavy extrapolation into the future; for example, Jacob Coxon cites "hacking critical infrastructure" and "extinction-level bioweapons" without further elaboration. But Coxon is not an expert on critical infrastructure, nor on bioweapons -- nor, for that matter, on extinction. [...] That said, we should not expect the public to understand LLMs, critical infrastructure, bioweapons, extinction biology, etc. -- that burden must lie with those making the claim. The lesson that I learned (shamefully) decades ago is that domain experts, by way of their expertise, implicitly hold the public's trust -- and we must not abuse it. It is incumbent upon us to be circumspect in our claims -- and maximally so when raising the alarm. Bryan talked about his doubts about the bioweapons concerns in the recent episode of Oxide and Friends that I joined. You can hear more of his thoughts on that starting at 51m44s in that episode. Here's 57m04s: I really think we need to be careful because it's so easy to be overcome with fear when we kind of make up these... it can give you biological weapons. Like, how? I mean, can we please have a biologist weigh in on this? Or can we have like someone who's got experience with bioweapons? [...] The bioweapon thing just gets under my fingernails because it leaves so much to the imagination that we insert with fear. Via Lobste.rs Tags: ai, anthropic, bryan-cantrill, ai-ethics ## Quoting Terence Tao DevFeed: [Quoting Terence Tao]() Original publisher: [Read original article]() Author: Simon Willison Published: 2026-09-09T00:20:17Z Content type: opinion Language: en Sources: [Simon Willison's Weblog]() Topics: [ai-ethics](), [Mathematics](), [Artificial Intelligence]() Tags: [ai](), [ai-2-236](), [ai-ethics](), [ai-ethics-343](), [ethics](), [mathematics](), [mathematics-22]() ### AI overview The article quotes Terence Tao on the risk that AI-powered efforts could rapidly exhaust promising open mathematical problems after even rumors of active research become public. It argues that these incentives may discourage researchers from sharing directions openly, potentially harming long-standing traditions of open science and the future of the field. ### Source excerpt I wrote recently about how the collection of good, fruitful open problems is now being mined in a non-renewable fashion, leading to the potential scenario of these problems becoming scarce. [...] We have now seen that even the rumor of someone working on a problem can trigger a massive amount of AI-powered effort to flatten it before the original research project has time to reach its full potential. The incentives may now be pointing in the direction of no longer sharing any promising research directions with the broader community, which would reverse centuries of traditions of open science and do serious long-term damage to the future of the field. -- Terence Tao Tags: ai-ethics, mathematics, ai