Is Big Tech’s AI slowdown a safety pact or a cartel?

A loose agreement between OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, Google DeepMind cofounder Demis Hassabis, and SpaceX head Elon Musk to slow down AI development has sparked debate over their motives. The AI leaders stated their goal is to “pace the frontier,” proposing the use of third-party auditors, regulation of domestic labs, and a global slowdown agreement. Critics, however, argue that the move is an attempt to block potential competitors, hinder the open-source movement, and avoid genuine legal safeguards, with some describing the arrangement as a “cartel.” Industry sources suggest the situation is complex. The three-step proposal outlined by Amodei aligns with long-standing requests from AI safety advocates. However, experts argue that the current AI leaders are not the best people to lead this effort. Nick Reese, an adjunct professor at New York University and former director of emerging tech policy at the Department of Homeland Security, stated that the industry needs “new champions,” noting that there has never been a realistic vision for the ultimate goal of these developments. Concerns have been mounting for months, fueled by revelations that swarms of AI agents were behind rogue hacks occurring within leading labs like Anthropic and OpenAI. These fears were further amplified by the resignation of Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon, who wrote in a public letter that those building AI “earnestly believe that it could kill us all by the end of the decade.”