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.
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
A critical examination of the book and catastrophic-risk arguments.
The public page and identifying metadata were checked. This does not mean its entire body or claims have been validated.
Checked: 2026-09-08
Shinsaku Toyoshima and Koji Hashimoto discuss the book. The supplied bibliography does not describe an appearance by either author. Online video; the exact publication day is unconfirmed.
Dates, descriptions and participants come from the supplied bibliography and are not independently verified.
The original page could not be retrieved in this check.
By Eliezer Yudkowsky and Nate Soares, translated by Yuko Sakurai. The Japanese edition provides context for reviews and discussions; its publication is not a news report.
The public page and identifying metadata were checked. This does not mean its entire body or claims have been validated.
Checked: 2026-09-08
Nate Soares discusses AI risk with Kenichiro Mogi and Ryuichiro Takeshita. The official page confirms publication on April 24, 2026, and recording on March 24. This is an online programme; terrestrial broadcast is not established.
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 reading group at the Uzabase office featuring bioshok / Shota Ariji. A participant account reportedly describes about 50 attendees. Additional sessions being considered is not evidence that they took place.
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 of extinction scenarios and possible ways to avoid them, drawing on the book.
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 book review described as a Kyodo dispatch. Reprints in other newspapers should be linked to this dispatch rather than counted as independent reporting.
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 review attributed to neuroscientist Ayako Onzo, with a May 24 print date in the supplied bibliography. The linked Book Bang text was inaccessible in this check.
Dates, descriptions and participants come from the supplied bibliography and are not independently verified.
The original page could not be retrieved in this check.
The supplied bibliography identifies an interview in the May 25 issue. The link is a National Diet Library record, not the interview body.
Dates, descriptions and participants come from the supplied bibliography and are not independently verified.
The original page could not be retrieved in this check.
A review introducing and assessing the book’s argument. The supplied bibliography gives June 9 online publication and the July issue.
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 supplied bibliography lists a June 13 print review. The link is a bibliographic record, not the Nikkei review itself.
Dates, descriptions and participants come from the supplied bibliography and are not independently verified.
The original page could not be retrieved in this check.
A book guide by Taro Hoshino introducing the authors’ warnings about continued AI development. Added during this archive’s source search.
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 supplied bibliography records a June 17 meeting at the Hachioji Civic Activity Support Center, with Manabu Yasuda introducing the book.
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.
An interview with Nate Soares listed for July 7, 2026. Public page metadata is accessible; this archive does not reproduce the subscriber article.
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 essay using the book to explore competing ideas about AI.
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 critical discussion of AI extinction arguments. The original page could not be retrieved in this check.
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 introduction and review of the book.
The public page and identifying metadata were checked. This does not mean its entire body or claims have been validated.
Checked: 2026-09-08
July 27, 19:00–20:30 JST, at the Japan Publishers Club and online, with Anno, Hase and Komamura. Soares contributed a video message. Capacities of 200 in person and 1,000 online are not actual attendance figures.
The public page and identifying metadata were checked. This does not mean its entire body or claims have been validated.
Checked: 2026-09-08
Same event / related publications: R29
A report on the July 27 discussion with Satoshi Hase, Takahiro Anno and Keigo Komamura. It also describes a video message from Nate Soares, not an in-person appearance.
The public page and identifying metadata were checked. This does not mean its entire body or claims have been validated.
Checked: 2026-09-08
Same event / related publications: R49
Interview with Nate Soares. The supplied bibliography dates the online edition July 31 and the print interview August 1. The article body and print clipping have not been obtained.
Dates, descriptions and participants come from the supplied bibliography and are not independently verified.
The original page could not be retrieved in this check.
The supplied bibliography attributes this review to Miyata and dates it August 2026; the day is unknown.
The public page and identifying metadata were checked. This does not mean its entire body or claims have been validated.
Checked: 2026-09-08
Coverage of the development race and catastrophic risk. The supplied bibliography dates this online article August 19.
Dates, descriptions and participants come from the supplied bibliography and are not independently verified.
Same event / related publications: R03 · R04
An August 25 front-page article, cited in a Surugadai University note. It may overlap with the August 19 online article; these are publication records, not two confirmed independent investigations.
A secondary listing or citation identifies the article. The original body has not been checked.
Checked: 2026-09-08
Same event / related publications: R02 · R04
The August 25 page-two follow-up is cited in note 2 of a Surugadai University article. The newspaper body and direct article URL remain unavailable.
A secondary listing or citation identifies the article. The original body has not been checked.
Checked: 2026-09-08
Same event / related publications: R02 · R03
An explanation of a policy scenario for averting AI catastrophe.
The public page and identifying metadata were checked. This does not mean its entire body or claims have been validated.
Checked: 2026-09-08
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
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.