Sunday, October 25, 2026
Source trace. Via News points to the documents behind its reporting and shows what we drew from each — so you can check any claim. How we source
Source document

The U.S. Public Wants Regulation (or Prohibition) of Expert‑Level and Superhuman AI

View original at futureoflife.org
Future of Life Institute - Ai Safety Title: The U.S. Public Wants Regulation (or Prohibition) of Expert‑Level and Superhuman AI Date: 2025-10-19 19:08 Source: https://futureoflife.org/recent-news/americans-want-regulation-or-prohibition-of-superhuman-ai/ <p>A new national survey of 2,000 U.S…
Opening lines of the source · short snapshot — read the full document at the original

What we drew from this source

The claims Via News extracted from this document. We point to the source; we don't replace it.

  • 49% of surveyed Americans expect superhuman AI to be developed within 5 years.

    80% confidence
  • Almost half (44%) of Americans think AI will do more harm than good, while only 38% think the opposite.

    80% confidence
  • Almost two-thirds (64%) of surveyed Americans feel that superhuman AI should not be developed until it is proven safe and controllable, or should never be developed.

    80% confidence
  • Top reasons supporting development of advanced AI included solving major social and scientific challenges and creating abundance.

    80% confidence
  • OpenAI, Anthropic, xAI, Google, Meta, and others have openly declared they are racing to expert-level or superhuman AI, while many actively hamper efforts to create meaningful guardrails.

    80% confidence
  • Two-thirds (64%) of surveyed adults would like to see an immediate pause on the development of advanced AI until the technology is proven to be safe.

    80% confidence
  • International scientific organizations ranked first among entities the public believes should determine the trajectory of advanced AI, with national government agencies a close second.

    80% confidence
  • Two-thirds of adults worry that advanced AI is likely (61% or greater chance) to cause significant harm to humanity if developed without proper safeguards.

    80% confidence
  • Two-thirds (69%) of surveyed Americans trust AI researchers at universities and non-profits, and international bodies most for AI safety guidance.

    80% confidence
  • There is overwhelming support (73%) for robust regulation on AI among surveyed Americans, with only 12% opposed to strong regulation.

    80% confidence
  • This is the first public large-scale survey specifically addressing U.S. public attitudes toward the development of advanced AI systems of the type referred to as AGI and superintelligence.

    80% confidence
  • One-third (37%) of adults are concerned that AI could cause the end of the human race on earth.

    80% confidence
  • A majority of adults (57%) are not bought in to the development of expert-level AI under current conditions; 17% feel it should never be developed and 40% feel it should be halted until proven controllable and safe.

    80% confidence
  • 49% of surveyed Americans think expert-level AI will be developed within 2 years.

    80% confidence
  • Top reasons cited for not developing advanced AI centered around human extinction or enfeeblement and concentration of power.

    80% confidence
  • There is a clear disconnect between the stated mission of leading AI companies and the wishes of the American public.

    80% confidence
  • Three-quarters (74%) of adults are concerned about the possibility of AI resulting in the concentration of power in technology companies.

    80% confidence
  • 40% of Americans think AI will have a negative impact on society, and only 29% expect it to have a positive impact.

    80% confidence
  • AI companies and their leadership score significantly lower than scientific institutions in public trust for AI safety guidance.

    80% confidence
  • 69% of Americans think the government is not doing enough to regulate the use of AI.

    80% confidence
  • Only 5% of surveyed Americans support the status quo of fast, unregulated AI development.

    80% confidence
  • Around half of respondents expect that advanced AI will be developed quickly with minimal safeguards, despite not wanting this outcome.

    80% confidence
  • 73% of surveyed Americans support slow, heavily regulated AI development, approximately matching the proportion wanting pharmaceutical-style regulation with extensive testing before deployment.

    80% confidence
  • Respondents with higher AI knowledge tend to appreciate both upsides and downsides of advanced AI and demand tighter safeguards.

    80% confidence
  • A majority of adults (59%) have little or no confidence in US companies to develop and use AI responsibly.

    80% confidence
What we know · the intelligence behind this page
Live from the substrate
What we're seeing
Enterprise Software Races to Govern and Consolidate Around Agentic AI
Enterprise software vendors are repositioning around autonomous AI agents. Salesforce is acquiring Braze, ServiceNow is launching agent governance tools (AI Passport, Super Intelligence Control Tower), SAP is pushing its 'Autonomous Enterprise', and Zeta is launching AthenaOS and its own inference model. Palantir is embedding itself in banking, aviation and sovereign AI infrastructure through partnerships with Customers Bank, Surf Air, Ondas and Armada. Governance, data sovereignty and enforced policy are emerging as preconditions for regulated sectors like finance. Investors such as Norwest see room to disrupt ERP and finance software, and they caution that AI should not be trusted with financial calculations. Consolidation and shareholder disputes (Salesforce/Braze, Tiny/Oso Cloud, ZenaTech/Boardwalktech) show the market reshaping.
Our read on the data ›
Signals we're tracking
EPKINLY Regulatory-Clinical Success Cascade
High probability of expanded label indications, additional combination approvals, and competitive positioning strength in follicular lymphoma market. Predicts positive commercial uptake and potential accelerated review for related indications.
Patterns we're watching ›
Where sources disagree
Ford Motor Company
Both facts give cash for Ford Motor Company at the same point in time (2025-12-31; FY 2025 year-end and Q4 2025 year-end are the same date). Both are labelled USD, but the values are 23,356,000,000 and 23.356, which cannot both be true in USD. The two numbers agree once the second is read as billions (23.356 bn = 23,356,000,000), so the economic content is consistent and the conflict is a unit/scale error in the Q4 2025 record. The period is not the reason for the conflict: a Q4 and an FY figure at the same year-end date should match.
We flag conflicts openly ›
Recently verified
✓ Checked against the original source
4,994
facts traced to their source — and we flag the ones that don't hold up.
101 entities tracked4,994 facts checked against source5,500 source documents archived
Query this data → isubstrate.com
The U.S. Public Wants Regulation (or Prohibition) of Expert‑Level and Superhuman AI — Source | Via News | Via News