Newspapers, programmes, reviews and conversations. Who is speaking, where they appear, and what is being debated.
Publication records for NHK, TBS, TV Asahi and BBC Japanese.
Explore records →Hinton’s warnings, AI 2027, and disagreement about accelerating development.
2025 records →A Japanese book edition, author interviews, newspaper reviews and public discussions.
Explore records →This sequence organises the collected sources. It does not establish influence between outlets or measure public awareness.
An interview listed in June 2025. The supplied bibliography does not establish the day of publication.
Dates, descriptions and participants come from the supplied bibliography and are not independently verified.
An introduction to the alternative scenarios in AI 2027, co-authored by Daniel Kokotajlo.
Dates, descriptions and participants come from the supplied bibliography and are not independently verified.
The original page could not be retrieved in this check.
An explanation including discussion with Daniel Kokotajlo and criticism of the forecast. The scenarios should not be presented as established future events.
The public page and identifying metadata were checked. This does not mean its entire body or claims have been validated.
Checked: 2026-09-08
Related reporting on updated forecasts, discussing AGI in 2031 and ASI in 2034. These dates are forecasts, not established outcomes.
The public page and identifying metadata were checked. This does not mean its entire body or claims have been validated.
Checked: 2026-09-08
The headline’s “88% accurate” is the article’s own assessment. This archive has not validated that metric or the forecast.
The public page and identifying metadata were checked. This does not mean its entire body or claims have been validated.
Checked: 2026-09-08
A follow-up interview listed in July 2026. The article body has not been accessed, so the extent of its discussion of extinction is unknown.
Dates, descriptions and participants come from the supplied bibliography and are not independently verified.
Commentary on an overseas interview. The supplied description explicitly distinguishes the percentage being discussed from a probability of human extinction.
The public page and identifying metadata were checked. This does not mean its entire body or claims have been validated.
Checked: 2026-09-08
An independent Japanese-language explanation of the scenario.
The public page and identifying metadata were checked. This does not mean its entire body or claims have been validated.
Checked: 2026-09-08
An independent introduction to AI 2027. Scenario discussion is not a verified prediction.
The public page and identifying metadata were checked. This does not mean its entire body or claims have been validated.
Checked: 2026-09-08
A video introducing an overseas interview and reactions to the report. It is not classified as a direct interview conducted by a Japanese broadcaster.
Dates, descriptions and participants come from the supplied bibliography and are not independently verified.
The original page could not be retrieved in this check.
All 49 entries in the supplied bibliography are included, plus seven additional records from source searches. This is not an exhaustive search of print, paywalled articles or broadcast archives. The 56 records are not 56 independent news reports.
Newspapers, broadcaster web output, translated journalism, publisher promotion, individual commentary and events are distinguished. Publication volume cannot establish how many people understand the arguments.
English accompanies the Japanese descriptions. English titles are editorial renderings, not official English headlines from the outlets. The images page pairs two Asahi headline excerpts and the top of a TBS article with English versions. Full article translations are not included.
Japanese excerpts were captured after checking their sources in a browser. English images are unofficial editorial translations, not English editions issued by the outlets. Hidden text has not been reconstructed.
Soares and Yudkowsky’s strong extinction predictions, Kokotajlo’s alternative scenarios and Hinton’s risk warnings are distinct claims. Extinction, catastrophe and loss of human control are not interchangeable.
Figures such as “88% accurate” and “70%” depend on their sources’ definitions and assessments. They are not treated here as validated statistics. Agreement with an argument is different from understanding it.