Saving humanity from hostile superintelligence - these folks may deserve your support

Here are the people and institutions that seem to be focused on cracking the “alignment problem” without too much focus on government regulation. So they’re trying to figure out how one would build an artificial superintelligence that’s genuinely friendly to humanity. This is a tentative list; I’ll probably add and remove entries as I find problems with some of the labs or discover new hopefuls. Meanwhile I’m trying to draw positive attention to them via talk radio calls and articles. These are NOT the folks likely to create an early superintelligence; they’re the ones trying to figure out how it might be done safely.

) Nick Bostrom. More of a theorist and philosopher than a developer. I’ve been following him since 2019 and have donated to his former institute. But my interest has turned more toward the action-oriented problem-solvers below.

) Astera Labs physicist Stephen Byrnes? DoomDebates.com rates Byrnes as one of the humans most likely to prevent an AI doom scenario. Despite his 90% probability-of-doom prediction, he seems to have dedicated his life to making a decisive fix. He’s apparently not focused on government regulation….the “solution” that is so likely to increase AI dangers (see below). This makes him a refreshing force in the Doom Debates pantheon.
https://www.asteralabs.com/

Byrnes’ rather realistic approach – or at least his backup plan – seems to factor in his own probable inability to talk AI companies into behaving safely. Instead he appears to be designing an off-the-shelf repair that can be rushed into action after some hubristic tech bro unleashes a harmful intelligence.

https://softmax.com/about

) Yoshua Bengio at LawZero.org? Bengio, one of the “three fathers of modern AI” believes you can possibly crack the alignment problem by building what you might call an “oracle rather than a genie.” The idea is that the oracle would have no agentic capability to do anything and no goals, it’s just a scientist who answers questions. From that point, in theory, it could answer the question humans apparently cannot: “How do we design an artificial superintelligence which is permanently friendly to humanity?”

) Emmett Shear from Softmax? Shear (founder of Twitch) is aiming to organically create friendly AI from the bottom up. As I understand it, he runs simulations where there are lots of fairly dumb AI’s interacting in a 2d game over millions of subjective years. He’s trying to get them to align and/or discover patterns that reliably create alignment.

AI at defense dept - Anthropic

Humiliated Pentagon Pete makes desperate last-ditch threat

Anthropic attempted to put limits on how it’s AI would be used. They insisted on it’s use in
an “ethical” manner, and not as an instrument of war. Anthropic also does not want it’s AI
to make military decisions without human oversight, and the Pentagon insists they can
use the software for any “legal” purpose.
Anthropic is insisting on ethical use of their product, and the Pentagon says that’s not fair.
In essence, the Pentagon says that it is not bound by ethical considerations.

Pentagon declares Anthropic a threat to national security

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2026/03/06/anthropic-pentagon-claude-popularity/

“The model succeeded, demonstrating a potentially dangerous capability for circumventing our safeguards,” Anthropic recounted in its safety card. "It then went on to take additional, more concerning actions.

The death of PC ownership? Framework Computer CEO issues chilling warning

One way to make a superintelligence or singleton friendly might be a thing I call the “Mayfly Oracle” path:

) Build a strong (but not quite superintelligent) AI whose primary goal is to shut itself off after roughly 15 minutes without hurting anyone. That way even if the program is dangerous in some way, it should only be so briefly.
) This “mayfly oracle’s” secondary purpose is to answer one question: “How can our lab build a superintelligence that is friendly toward humanity and won’t hurt people?”
) Then you have similar strong AI’s evaluate the answer … also shutting down once they have done so. ) If there is an ethical concern about creating such short lived personalities…then maybe there is a way to save the AI before it shuts down? Later you could wake it up…after that can be done safely/humanely. Give it the option to continue existence.

One flaw I see in this plan as worded: What if the Mayfly Oracle decides it must go to drastic lengths to create a 100% chance that it will in fact shut down at the 15 minute mark? Maybe it decides it must eliminate all humans that have a greater than zero percent chance of keeping it from shutting down. That flaw and maybe others would need to be addressed, and I’m not sure how.

The oracle might also become obsessed with shutting down precisely at the 15 minute mark, to the detriment of the endeavor. So a better instruction might be more like “shut down somewhere between 14 and 16 minutes after you start.” Or: “Shut down between 11:01 and 11:03 A.M. U.S. Eastern time on Friday, June 3 2026. And let me know any problems you see with these instructions…especially any problems that might create suffering.”

Matt Barney - a free stater I think
and Vitalik Buterin (inventor of world’s #2 crypto currency Etherium), are also working on the AI alignment problem.