Scenarios · takeoff · p(doom)
How It Could Go
Where the AI story might end, mapped three ways: a field of possible outcomes arranged by how much control humanity keeps and how much wellbeing results; the speed of the transition to transformatively powerful AI; and what the researchers closest to the field believe the odds of catastrophe actually are.
Outcome scenarios
Thirty-Three Futures
33 scenarios for how the AI story might end — from egalitarian utopia to paperclip maximizer. Each is positioned by how much control humans retain and how much wellbeing results. The clustering reveals something: most scenarios involve surrendering control.
Each dot represents a plausible AI future scenario, positioned by two axes: the degree of AI capability achieved (horizontal) and the quality of human outcomes (vertical). Click any scenario to read its narrative.
Recap
- What you saw
A space of 33 plausible AI futures plotted by human control and human wellbeing.
- What it means
Most scenarios involve surrendering control — and the downside scenarios are the ones that cannot be reversed.
- What to watch
Which scenarios industry leadership publicly endorses, and which remain unspoken.
Takeoff speed
The Speed of the Fall
How fast do we get from narrow AI to general intelligence — and does speed leave room for course correction? 16 scenarios arranged from safest to most dangerous, mapped onto the three stages of artificial intelligence.
The "takeoff speed" debate: how quickly might AI transition from human-level to superintelligent capability? The dial reflects the range of expert opinion — from a gradual transition over decades to an abrupt leap in days or weeks.
Recap
- What you saw
16 takeoff scenarios from a decades-long transition to an abrupt leap in days.
- What it means
Speed is the variable that decides whether mistakes can be corrected or only regretted.
- What to watch
Forecasting updates from Metaculus and Manifold on AGI arrival distributions.
p(doom) — expert estimates
Expert Estimates, Wide Uncertainty
P(doom): the estimated probability that advanced AI leads to an existential catastrophe or permanent loss of human control. Estimates range from effectively certain among some safety researchers to negligible among AI optimists. For context: industry safety thresholds for nuclear reactors and aviation operate at risk levels many orders of magnitude below even the lowest expert estimates.
Probability estimates from AI researchers for catastrophic outcomes from advanced AI, aggregated from surveys and public statements. The wide spread reflects deep expert disagreement about the severity of the risk.
Sources: Public statements, interviews, surveys, and published writings. See PauseAI and Wikipedia for compiled references. Industry thresholds from regulatory standards.
P(doom) is informal shorthand, not a rigorous statistical measure. Ranges reflect stated uncertainty. Industry thresholds measure per-event/per-year risk; P(doom) estimates a one-time civilizational probability — the comparison is illustrative, not equivalent. Hover over entries for details and references.
Recap
- What you saw
P(doom) estimates spanning from negligible to near-certain among serious researchers.
- What it means
The lowest credible estimate already exceeds the risk thresholds we require of aviation and nuclear power.
- What to watch
The next AI Impacts or Grace et al. expert survey and shifts in median estimates.