If you’re willing to entertain the views outlined above, then it’s not very hard to argue that AI could be a risk to our safety and security. There are two common sense reasons to be concerned. First, it may be tricky to build safe, reliable, and steerable systems when those systems are starting to become as intelligent and as aware of their surroundings as their designers. To use an analogy, it is easy for a chess grandmaster to detect bad moves in a novice but very hard for a novice to detect bad moves in a grandmaster. If we build an AI system that’s significantly more competent than human
Core views on AI safety: When, why, what, and how…can Claude develop, test, and analyze alignment ideas of its own? And, if it can, what might that imply about how far today’s AI models can accelerate the pace of alignment…
Announcements Claude Science, an AI workbench for scientists, is now available Jun 30, 2026 Get started with Claude Science AI has the potential to dramatically accelerate the pace of scientific discovery and…
Anthropic is an AI safety and research company that's working to build reliable, interpretable, and steerable AI systems.
…It is calculated based on the actor's activity across Claude.ai, Claude Code, and our API, drawing on our safety classifiers alongside open-source and internal threat-intelligence indicators. The higher…
Anthropic is an AI safety and research company that's working to build reliable, interpretable, and steerable AI systems.
…How willing users are to experiment with AI, and whether policymakers create a regulatory context that advances both safety and innovation, will shape how AI transforms economies. For AI to benefit users…
To show you the most relevant results, we’ve omitted some entries very similar to those already shown. Repeat the search with the omitted results included.