Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has criticised the approach taken by some of the biggest AI companies and said advanced AI should not be controlled by a small group of organisations. In an interview with The New York Times, Zuckerberg argued that tightly controlled AI development would slow innovation and go against the values that have shaped the American technology industry. While he did not directly name OpenAI or Anthropic, his remarks were widely seen as a response to their focus on AI safety and tighter controls. Zuckerberg said AI should be available to more people instead of being kept in the hands of a few companies or institutions.
His comments come as the debate over the future of AI continues to divide the tech industry. Some companies believe powerful AI systems should be developed carefully with strict safeguards. Others argue that wider access to AI will lead to faster progress and more innovation.
Also read: Over 1,100 OpenAI, Google, Anthropic and other AI employees call for AI slowdown, cite real risk
“So much of the discourse from a lot of the other labs that are developing this is overwhelmingly filled with doom,” Zuckerberg said in the interview, as reported by ANI. “There needs to be a voice or several voices that are bringing realism to this debate.”
Zuckerberg also questioned the idea that a single, highly controlled AI system could safely serve everyone. He said people have different beliefs and needs, so one AI model should not decide what is best for everyone.
“I think a lot of people have this notion that if you build some kind of singular AI you can, through some idealised form of alignment, make sure it is benevolent to humanity,” Zuckerberg said. “I’m personally skeptical of that path.”
Also read: OpenAI’s rogue AI agent attacked another tech company before Hugging Face hack: Report
The interview comes shortly after Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei published a blog post explaining the company’s focus on AI safety. He said Anthropic wants to prevent powerful AI chips from reaching authoritarian governments, stop industrial-scale AI distillation, and require safety testing for highly capable AI models.
“I don’t know if the goal is to have everyone agree on everything,” he said. “Almost by definition, if you believe what I do, you don’t need to convince everyone of everything.”
He added, “I believe the general arc of the industry has been toward more openness and putting the power of tech into more people’s hands, not fewer.”