# Technological Panic **Entity class:** Social response pattern **Domain:** Artificial intelligence / science / political economy **Maturity:** Developed ## Definition **Technological Panic** is a recurrent public reaction in which a novel capability is treated as an undifferentiated contaminant or civilizational threat before its mechanisms and separate risks are examined. ## Mechanism and Consequence Panic can reveal real hazards, but it can also collapse risk analysis into taboo, transfer authority to incumbents, and impose opportunity costs on science, infrastructure, medicine, and national capability. ## Relationships - [[wiki/Risk Debate|Risk Debate]] - [[wiki/AI Control|AI Control]] - [[wiki/AI Acceleration|AI Acceleration]] - [[wiki/Artificial Intelligence|Artificial Intelligence]] ## Source Dossiers - [[research/AI Is Now So Good They Will Pay You to Quit|AI Is Now So Good They Will Pay You to Quit]] - [[research/Super Intelligence Week Index of Statements from the White House Luncheon|Super Intelligence Week Index of Statements from the White House Luncheon]] - [[research/Jensen Pushes Back on Doomers Moonshots Live|Jensen Pushes Back on Doomers Moonshots Live]] ## Simple Reminders, Quotations, and Thoughts > "We are on the cusp of a moment I have been waiting for my entire life. I am not going to throw cold water on what may be the greatest moment in the history of humanity. We are moving forward at warp speed. [AI] is improving itself, and the ability to make the world dramatically better is right in front of us. Misuse is an incredible threat, and there are solutions to it, but this is happening anyway. Getting stuck on doomerism is completely dysfunctional. We are not slowing down." > **— Dave Blundin**, *MOONSHOTS Live, September 25, 2026* [[reminders/AI-Tech Doomers/Doomerism Cannot Stop the Greatest Technological Moment by Dave Blundin|Doomerism Cannot Stop the Greatest Technological Moment by Dave Blundin]] > "There are so many real problems that need to be solved. I hate the idea that we are going to turn [superintelligence] into a do-or-don’t argument, which is utterly insane. Liability law in the United States makes it very easy to scare people into doing nothing. If people fear twenty years in prison before the rule has even been proposed, they stop acting, and that is the worst thing that could come out of this." > **— Dave Blundin**, *MOONSHOTS Live, September 25, 2026* [[reminders/Risk Debate/Fear of Prison Can Stop People From Solving Real Problems by Dave Blundin|Fear of Prison Can Stop People From Solving Real Problems by Dave Blundin]] > "I think something probably went wrong after World War II, and we lost at least fifty years of progress due to moral panic over nuclear energy. I am seriously concerned that a moral panic over superintelligence could set us back another fifty years." > **— Alexander Wissner-Gross**, *MOONSHOTS Live, September 25, 2026* [[reminders/AI-Tech Doomers/Superintelligence Panic Could Cost Another Fifty Years of Progress by Alexander Wissner-Gross|Superintelligence Panic Could Cost Another Fifty Years of Progress by Alexander Wissner-Gross]] > "Nobody is building more compute today than the people asking to be slowed down. All of the other narratives deflect blame and make it sound like AI is so powerful: ‘I have no idea how to fix it. It’s not my fault. It’s just because the technology is so powerful.’" > **— Jensen Huang**, *MOONSHOTS Live, September 25, 2026* [[reminders/AI-Tech Doomers/The Builders Asking to Slow AI Are Still Building the Most Compute by Jensen Huang|The Builders Asking to Slow AI Are Still Building the Most Compute by Jensen Huang]] > "I would tell Geoffrey Hinton that it is irresponsible to say [there is a ten-percent chance of societal destruction from AI]. All of his predictions have been wrong. Enough predictions. That ten-percent chance is not grounded in science. It is not grounded in research. Just because it comes from a scientist does not make it scientific." > **— Jensen Huang**, *MOONSHOTS Live, September 25, 2026* [[reminders/AI-Science Doomers/A Scientist's Prediction Is Not Scientific Without Evidence by Jensen Huang|A Scientist's Prediction Is Not Scientific Without Evidence by Jensen Huang]] > "I think the worst possible outcome [for superintelligence] is deceleration, so don’t decelerate." > **— Alexander Wissner-Gross**, *MOONSHOTS Live, September 25, 2026* [[reminders/AI-Science Doomers/The Worst Outcome for Superintelligence Is Deceleration by Alexander Wissner-Gross|The Worst Outcome for Superintelligence Is Deceleration by Alexander Wissner-Gross]] > "We have evolved for four billion years fighting all sorts of threats. The universe tries to wipe you out; entropy tries to wipe you out. We are local anti-entropic phenomena that somehow manage to create order out of chaos, and the idea that we will now be wiped out by [AI] seems unbelievably absurd." > **— Salim Ismail**, *MOONSHOTS Live, September 25, 2026* [[reminders/Civilization/Humanity Is a Four-Billion-Year Anti-Entropic Phenomenon by Salim Ismail|Humanity Is a Four-Billion-Year Anti-Entropic Phenomenon by Salim Ismail]] > "When examining the superintelligence debate, ask what evidence on either side would make someone change their mind. If you think ASI is bad, your narrative may be stuck; there may be nothing anyone can show you to prove it is not bad, and the same is true on the other side. It is very difficult to change narratives in our world." > **— Salim Ismail**, *MOONSHOTS Live, September 25, 2026* [[reminders/Scientific Literacy/Ask What Evidence Could Change Your Mind About Superintelligence by Salim Ismail|Ask What Evidence Could Change Your Mind About Superintelligence by Salim Ismail]] > “Those who fight against prophecy only draw it more tightly around their throats.” > **— Circe**, *Circe* [[reminders/Risk Debate/Fighting Prophecy Draws It Tighter Around the Throat by Madeline Miller|Fighting Prophecy Draws It Tighter Around the Throat by Madeline Miller]]