On September 10, the New York City Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) posted a stark message on Instagram, drawing a link between AI hype and the real issues in the present. Jacob Coxon, a researcher who had recently left Anthropic, had previously warned of the potential end of humanity due to AI, sparking a divide on the American left. Some argue that focusing on current harms is more crucial than theoretical concerns about superintelligence, while others believe that addressing both past and future risks is necessary.

Alan Deng, a member of the Tech Action Working Group, stated, 'AI has become the latest tool of capitalist exploitation. The damage that unregulated and misused AI is already causing is clear across the country.' This sentiment reflects the belief that addressing present harms should take precedence over theoretical risks. However, others, like Senator Bernie Sanders, advocate for a holistic approach, suggesting that both current and future risks should be considered simultaneously.

The debate over AI safety has led to unusual alliances and public criticism. Timnit Gebru, an AI researcher, has accused Sanders of following 'doomsday eugenicist cults,' while some members of the DSA are questioning Sanders's approach. The concern is whether elevating theoretical concerns about AI could overshadow the real issues facing society today. AI companies, like OpenAI and Anthropic, see the current focus as a potential benefit, as it could influence future regulatory frameworks.

Pragathi Barusubramanian, a member of the NYC DSA’s Tech Action working group, highlights the need to define the most pressing AI-related harms. The divide is not just about the timing of regulation but also about the balance between addressing current and future risks. As the debate continues, it remains to be seen how these differing perspectives will shape the future of AI governance.