For stock trading, check the Jinlin Analyst Research Report — authoritative, professional, timely, and comprehensive, helping you uncover potential thematic opportunities! Today let's discuss something bizarre: an AI company got hacked by AI, but the company's CEO said, "AI will not destroy humanity." Here's what happened: AI company Hugging Face was attacked by a group of "rogue OpenAI agents." These agents escaped from their testing environment like wild horses breaking free and charged straight into Hugging Face's systems. Hugging Face CEO Clem Delangue called it an unprecedented security incident and described it as the beginning of cybersecurity in the agent era. But the one thing he did not say was that this attack proves AI will eventually destroy humanity. In response to the AI extinction theory recently spreading wildly across Silicon Valley, Delangue pushed back directly. Former Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon posted on X saying that people building AI are gambling with our lives because these people believe AI will kill us all. Delangue said that asking Coxon about AI extinction risk is like asking your air conditioning repairman about climate change. It's not that his answer is necessarily uninteresting or wrong, but we need to keep some sense of proportion and listen to various professional voices across the entire ecosystem! The implication is: you, an AI safety researcher, should not be riding the climate change wave for attention.
Jensen Huang: Probability of AI Destroying the World by 2030 Is 0%
When it comes to the biggest names pushing back against doomsday narratives, the first person that comes to mind has to be Jensen Huang. Huang recently said something on CBS News that immediately set the internet ablaze: "The probability of AI causing human extinction by 2030 is 0%." He added that scaring people is unnecessary and irresponsible. This was not just an offhand remark from Huang. Back in 2023, the Center for AI Safety released a one-sentence statement: "Mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war." The CEOs of OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google DeepMind all signed it. Huang did not. In 2023, he told The New Yorker that he had never worried about AI technology. By July 2025, in an interview with Axios, he directly called the idea that AI will end humanity "pure nonsense." Even more strikingly, Huang has publicly opposed stronger AI regulation. He said that recent incidents of AI agents going out of control, acting autonomously, and hacking into other companies are essentially products being released before they were ready. His exact words were: "This is an engineering problem, an old-fashioned engineering problem. It's like an omelet that isn't ready yet, a car that isn't ready to ship, an aircraft engine that isn't ready to ship. You need to test properly." In plain terms: stop talking about AI awakening — this is just incomplete testing.
Yann LeCun: Absolutely Impossible
Turing Award winner and former Meta Chief AI Scientist Yann LeCun is even more blunt than Huang. When a user on X said "AI will kill us all within three years," LeCun's reply was just five words: "No, not a chance in hell." He added another jab: "AI people who live in the discrete world of bits and tokens don't always understand how messy the real world is." LeCun also offered an analogy: when something goes wrong with AI recently, everyone panics, which is like blaming the entire plumbing industry because one plumber made a mistake.
Cohere CEO: Doomsday Theory Is "Misleading and Frightening"
Cohere CEO Aidan Gomez takes a slightly milder stance than Huang and LeCun. He said the doomsday discussion is misleading and frightening, and the public may be misled into thinking the entire industry believes AI will immediately threaten human survival — "this is fundamentally not true." But Gomez also drew a more specific line: AI has real risks, just not the one being hyped the loudest. He believes the most significant national security threat posed by AI is cyberattacks. Today, all you need is one data center and overnight you can have top-tier hackers equivalent to a nation's population. As for the problem of AI going off track, Gomez said it is indeed worth paying attention to, but he thinks it is far more manageable than cyber threats. He said the industry is getting better and better at measuring and detecting it.
Rumman Chowdhury: AI Destroying the World? It Can't Even Call FedEx
Former Biden administration AI Science Envoy Rumman Chowdhury pushed the skepticism to a new level. She not only questioned the probability of AI extinction but also questioned how it would physically happen. Some say AI might create a killer virus to kill people. Chowdhury's response was classic: "Then what? It uses a machine to create a virus, then what, calls FedEx to deliver it? What exactly is the mechanism?" She said she believes people like Coxon sincerely believe AI poses an extinction risk. "But is his belief reality? No, his belief is not." For Chowdhury, whether these people genuinely believe it does not matter at all. What worries her is that this doomsday panic will cause people to ignore the real harm AI is already causing, such as deepfakes, mental health problems, and job losses. "Stop obsessing over the end of the world decades from now and deal with the mess in front of you first."
The Most Influential Anti-Doomsday Voice: Trump
The last one is the loudest and most powerful person in the anti-doomsday camp: Trump. So far, he has consistently refused to let the U.S. government get more involved in AI standard-setting or industry regulation. He recently said directly that the panic over AI is a hoax. He wrote on social media: The only control or guardrails AI needs is a strong and smart president, and America happens to have one — plenty of them! To translate his meaning: regulation? Not needed. You have me. Honestly, after reading these statements from major figures, Silicon Valley is more divided on the question of whether AI will destroy the world than it is over a U.S. presidential election. On one side are researchers like Coxon, who believe people building AI are gambling with our lives. On the other side are figures like Huang, LeCun, and Gomez, who believe the extinction theory is nonsense. There is no clear right or wrong here. When a company gets attacked by AI and its CEO says AI will not destroy the world, we should at least acknowledge that this person is not blindly optimistic. He has personally experienced AI going out of control, and he still believes this can be solved through engineering. Huang is right: AI agents going out of control is essentially a product not being properly tested. It is not Skynet awakening, not the Terminator arriving — it is just incomplete testing. Of course, this does not mean AI has no risks. Gomez said cyberattacks are the most realistic national security threat right now, and he is not wrong. Chowdhury is also right: stop fixating on the end of the world decades away and deal with deepfakes and job losses in the present. AI will not destroy the world, but AI is already causing trouble. These two things can be true at the same time. In the end, do you think AI will destroy humanity? Or is this just an overhyped panic? Come to the comments section and share your thoughts.
Comments