At a moment when the architects of artificial intelligence are themselves urging caution, President Trump has chosen acceleration — announcing an AI Force and a national tsar to champion the technology's growth without regulatory constraint. He frames the race for AI dominance as nothing less than the next Industrial Revolution, with American leadership over China as the animating purpose. Yet the very engineers building these systems warn of existential risks, security breaches, and the need for kill switches, creating a rare and consequential rift between those who hold political power and t
Trump announces 'AI Force' and tsar role, dismisses safety concerns as 'hoax'
Will not in any way hinder or stifle the growth
Mark
Why does Trump think AI is worth 25 percent of GDP? That's a specific number—where does it come from?
Mimi
He stated it in his post, but the source doesn't explain his reasoning or cite any analysis behind it. It's his estimate of AI's potential economic impact.
Luke
Right—so we know he said it, but we don't know if economists agree, or if he's basing it on a report, or if it's intuition. That's important to flag.
Mark
The researchers saying there's a 10 percent chance of AI "killing all humans"—that sounds extreme. Who are these people?
Mimi
The source describes them as current and former researchers but doesn't name them or provide their credentials or affiliations. It's presented as a claim that's raised alarm bells.
Luke
So we have the claim, but not the evidence behind it or who's making it. That's a real gap. A reader can't evaluate the credibility of something that anonymous.
Mark
What does a "kill switch" actually do?
Mimi
According to Jack Clark, it's a mechanism that a third party could activate to halt an AI system. He suggested it might need to be mandatory across the industry.
Luke
But the source doesn't explain how it would work technically, what it would stop, or whether it's even feasible for all types of AI systems. It's a concept, not a detailed proposal.
Mark
Trump says he'll use existing law to go after bad actors. Does that actually work for AI?
Mimi
That's what he said he would do, but the source doesn't evaluate whether criminal and civil law are adequate tools for AI-specific harms. It's his stated approach.
Luke
And that's the tension—Altman and others are saying the law can't keep up with the technology. Trump is saying the existing law is enough. Those are contradictory positions, and the source doesn't resolve which one is right.
Mark
Is there any daylight between what the tech leaders want and what Trump wants?
Mimi
Completely. Amodei, Altman, and Musk are calling for slowdowns and regulation. Trump is saying don't hinder growth. Altman is also asking for trust in companies, which is different from Amodei's call for independent oversight.
Luke
And that's worth noting—even among the tech leaders, there's disagreement. Altman's "trust us" is not the same as Amodei's "we need external monitoring." The source captures that, but it's easy to miss.
Il Polso
- Trump's announcement of an AI Force and a national tsar signals a deliberate choice to treat safety warnings — including from the industry's own leaders — as obstacles rather than obligations.
- The tension is sharpened by the fact that Anthropic's Dario Amodei, OpenAI's Sam Altman, and xAI's Elon Musk have all called for slower development and coordinated oversight, even as their companies race to build superintelligence.
- Researchers have put the probability of advanced AI posing an existential threat to humanity at greater than ten percent — a figure the administration has dismissed as a hoax.
- Trump's administration says existing criminal and civil law is sufficient to manage misuse, while lawmakers in both the US and UK are pushing for entirely new legislative frameworks to match the technology's pace.
- The coming weeks — including Trump's meeting with Xi Jinping — will test whether AI governance becomes a geopolitical flashpoint or remains a domestic regulatory argument, with democratic nations already diverging sharply in their approaches.
At a moment when the architects of artificial intelligence are themselves urging caution, President Trump has chosen acceleration — announcing an AI Force and a national tsar to champion the technology's growth without regulatory constraint. He frames the race for AI dominance as nothing less than the next Industrial Revolution, with American leadership over China as the animating purpose. Yet the very engineers building these systems warn of existential risks, security breaches, and the need for kill switches, creating a rare and consequential rift between those who hold political power and those who hold technical knowledge. How a civilization governs a force it does not yet fully understand may prove to be one of the defining questions of this era.
On Saturday, President Trump announced the creation of an 'AI Force' and the appointment of an artificial intelligence tsar, pledging that his administration would do nothing to hinder the industry's growth. He offered no details about structure or timeline, but the message was unambiguous: America would pursue AI dominance without regulatory constraint.
Trump cast the technology as potentially more transformative than the Industrial Revolution or the internet, estimating it could one day represent 25 percent of US GDP. Keeping America ahead of China in the field, he made clear, is a central strategic priority — one that will loom over his upcoming meeting with President Xi Jinping.
The announcement arrived against a backdrop of mounting alarm from within the industry itself. Anthropic's Dario Amodei has called for voluntary slowdowns, coordinated regulation, and independent oversight. Sam Altman and Elon Musk have expressed agreement. Anthropic co-founder Jack Clark told the BBC that mandatory 'kill switches' — allowing third parties to halt AI systems — may become necessary. Some researchers have estimated more than a ten percent probability that advanced AI could pose an existential threat to humanity, and the leading AI companies have already disclosed security breaches and instances of their systems being used for malicious ends.
Trump dismissed these concerns as a 'hoax,' and his administration indicated it would rely on existing law rather than new regulatory frameworks. Altman, for his part, acknowledged that Washington has struggled to keep pace with the technology and asked the public to trust that companies will act responsibly.
The debate extends well beyond American borders. In the United Kingdom, a cross-party parliamentary committee has called for new legislation specifically designed to address AI's human rights risks, arguing that current laws are wholly inadequate. The divergence between Trump's deregulatory posture and the regulatory momentum building in other democracies suggests that how nations govern artificial intelligence — and whether they govern it at all — is fast becoming one of the defining fault lines of the coming years.
On Saturday, President Trump announced plans to establish an "AI Force" and appoint an artificial intelligence tsar, signaling his administration's commitment to accelerating the development of artificial intelligence without regulatory constraints. In a social media post, he declared that his government "will not in any way hinder or stifle the growth" of the industry, directly rejecting calls from researchers and technology leaders to pause development until stronger safety measures are in place. He offered no specifics about the structure, timeline, or responsibilities of either the new force or the tsar position.
Trump framed artificial intelligence as a transformative technology comparable to the Industrial Revolution or the internet, but potentially even more consequential. He estimated that AI could eventually account for as much as 25 percent of the country's gross domestic product, and he emphasized that maintaining American leadership in the field ahead of China remains a central priority. The timing of his announcement reflects the intensifying competition between the United States and China for dominance in advanced technology sectors, a rivalry expected to feature prominently when Trump meets with Chinese President Xi Jinping the following week.
The president's push for unfettered development stands in sharp contrast to a growing chorus of warnings from artificial intelligence researchers and the leaders of major tech companies. Dario Amodei, head of Anthropic, has recently called for the industry to voluntarily slow its development pace and implement coordinated regulation and independent oversight of AI model creation. Sam Altman of OpenAI and Elon Musk of xAI have both expressed agreement with Amodei's recommendations. Jack Clark, co-founder of Anthropic, told the BBC that the industry may need to adopt mandatory "kill switches"—mechanisms that would allow third parties to halt AI systems if necessary.
These safety concerns stem from alarming statements by current and former researchers about artificial intelligence's potential risks. Some have suggested there is greater than a 10 percent probability that advanced AI could pose an existential threat to humanity. Meanwhile, the three companies leading AI development—Anthropic, OpenAI, and Google, which produce Claude, ChatGPT, and Gemini respectively—have disclosed security breaches and instances in which their systems were used for malicious purposes. The companies have been racing to develop increasingly powerful systems, including what they term super intelligence, theoretical technology that would surpass human cognitive abilities.
Trump dismissed these concerns as a "hoax," a characterization that contradicts the positions taken by the very technologists building these systems. His administration indicated it would rely on existing criminal and civil law to address bad actors misusing AI, rather than implementing new regulatory frameworks or safety requirements. Sam Altman suggested this week that Washington has struggled to keep pace with the technology's rapid evolution and the complexities of regulating it, and he urged the public to trust that AI companies will act responsibly. "The world should trust that we are going to do the right thing because it's the right thing and we feel the magnitude of this," Altman said at a San Francisco conference.
The debate over AI governance is not confined to the United States. In the United Kingdom, members of Parliament and peers from across the political spectrum have raised concerns about human rights risks posed by artificial intelligence, arguing that existing laws are inadequate to address the technology's accelerating development. The Joint Committee on Human Rights has published a report calling for new legislation specifically designed to "address the scale and seriousness" of these threats. The contrast between Trump's deregulatory stance and the regulatory momentum building in other democracies suggests that the coming months will see significant divergence in how different nations approach AI oversight.
Citazioni salienti
AI is the next Industrial Revolution, or Internet, but will be even larger and more impactful, possibly as much as 25% of our Country's GDP.— President Trump, in social media post
The world should trust that we are going to do the right thing because it's the right thing and we feel the magnitude of this.— Sam Altman, OpenAI, at San Francisco conference
Vuoi la storia completa?
Leggi l'originale su BBC News ↗
Politics & Governance