Sebastian Galiani says Coxon's AI catastrophe warning deserves serious weight
Sebastian GalianiEconomist; Weatherhead Presidential Chair in Economics at Tulane University according to his personal academic site.
Galiani says Coxon's warning should be taken seriously because competing companies and states expose humanity to risks without collective authority to set the acceptable level. He remains uncertain about catastrophe probabilities and argues that using today's AI productively is compatible with taking this governance problem seriously.
“if there is even some probability of a catastrophic outcome, who decided that we should take that risk?”
Original post
Where this statement fits
Is Anthropic acting responsibly while advancing toward recursive self-improvement?
Jacob Coxon resigned from Anthropic and said that Anthropic and OpenAI are acting irresponsibly by racing toward self-improving superintelligence. In a fuller interview, he praised Anthropic's current practices and denied that it was already cutting corners; his criticism concerns the competitive race and the pressures he expects it to create. Responses dispute the evidence and timing of catastrophic-risk forecasts, whether continued work inside AI labs can be justified, and whether governments should pause development or regulate its continuation. The record distinguishes these disagreements from arguments about the rhetoric of public warnings.
Source and context
Original post
About this source
Full primary public post and available surrounding thread. Related context: https://www.sebastiangaliani.com/ Speaker and position scope are explained in the linked event.
Before the quotation
Galiani directly names Coxon's resignation, rejects certainty about extreme outcomes, and says he suspects nobody knows their probability.
After the quotation
He answers his quoted question with nobody, explains the company and geopolitical incentives as a race to the bottom, and concedes that he does not know how to solve the coordination problem.
How this statement is classified
The label describes this statement's response within the context above.
Why this label?
Galiani rejects an unmanaged race and the absence of collective consent. Uncertainty about probability and benefits of present tools do not constitute support for that conduct.
- Recorded on
- Published here
- People and groups discussed
- Anthropic, OpenAI
Corrections to this statement
These notices document reporting corrections, classification changes, and topic-label updates.
Classification correction
Correction to: Statement by Sebastian Galiani
- Previous classification
- Mixed or conditional. Criticizes governance of collective risk while conceding uncertain probabilities and benefits from current AI.
- Corrected classification
- Condemns. Galiani rejects an unmanaged race and the absence of collective consent. Uncertainty about probability and benefits of present tools do not constitute support for that conduct.
We corrected the editorial classification of Sebastian Galiani's response about Imposing collective AI risk without public authority or coordination. Galiani rejects an unmanaged race and the absence of collective consent. Uncertainty about probability and benefits of present tools do not constitute support for that conduct. This corrects our labeling, not a later change in the speaker's position.
This corrects an editorial classification.
Full primary public post and available surrounding thread. Related context: https://www.sebastiangaliani.com/ Speaker and position scope are explained in the linked event.
More from this case
Read the full caseCoxon criticizes startup norms in frontier AI development
“The companies run on a startup mindset: Move fast, break things, fix them later.”Read statement
Nathan Lambert distinguishes inference scaling from recursive self-improvement
“I was underestimating how much we are likely to scale inference-time compute in the near future, but this is different than RSI and I have not seen enough to convince me that an intelligence explosion is near.”Read statement
Gary Marcus says Dario Amodei has lost credibility
“Top three ways Dario Amodei has blown his credibility in seven days. I hate to say it, but President Trump was right, Dario is only pretending to be a perfect little angel.”Read statement
Share or embed this statement
The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the statement page.
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- Sebastian Galiani says Coxon's AI catastrophe warning deserves serious weight
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/events/240-galiani-says-coxon-s-warning-should-be-taken
Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.
The Dispute Index. "Sebastian Galiani says Coxon's AI catastrophe warning deserves serious weight". First published: 2026-09-10. Last updated: 2026-09-30. https://disputeindex.com/events/240-galiani-says-coxon-s-warning-should-be-taken