Andrew Ng, a leading figure in artificial intelligence development, has dismissed concerns that AI poses a significant existential threat to humanity. In an interview published Tuesday on The Economist’s "Inside Tech" podcast, Ng called warnings about AI-driven human extinction unfounded and criticized the use of exaggerated safety claims by some companies seeking to influence regulations.

Ng, who played a key role in launching the Google Brain project and co-founded the online education platform Coursera, argued that heightened fears about super-intelligent machines endangering human survival distract policymakers from more immediate, tangible issues. He highlighted how a few established AI businesses have leveraged these fears to lobby for restrictive regulations, which he said are designed to suppress competition from smaller startups.

“I think there are no meaningful human existential risks from AI,” Ng stated, suggesting that efforts aimed at preventing such hypothetical dangers are unnecessary. He further expressed concern about the growing intensity of lobbying efforts in 2023, where companies pushed for regulatory measures under what he described as “made-up safety arguments.” According to Ng, these measures serve to entrench dominant players in the AI sector by limiting the development and availability of alternative, often freely accessible, AI systems.

Ng also rejected comparisons between artificial intelligence and nuclear weapons, calling the analogy “irresponsible.” He pointed out fundamental differences between the two, noting that nuclear weapons have immediate destructive capacity, whereas AI is fundamentally a form of intelligence without inherent physical power. He cautioned that regulatory attention is being diverted toward hypothetical risks rather than addressing real and current challenges associated with AI technologies.

One such challenge Ng identified involves the misuse of AI to create non-consensual intimate deepfakes, which he described as a serious abuse meriting strict legislation and penalties. Rather than broad restrictions on AI development, Ng advocated for targeted legal measures to combat specific harms while preserving the technology’s overall positive potential.

Ng’s comments come amid increasing debate within the AI community and among policymakers regarding the balance between innovation, safety, and ethical concerns. He emphasized that governments should avoid stifling innovation through overregulation, particularly where AI holds significant promise for beneficial applications, and should instead focus efforts on preventing concrete abuses.