Concerns about the dangers of advanced artificial intelligence are growing inside Anthropic, with several researchers and employees publicly warning that AI development may be moving faster than the industry can safely manage.
The latest debate began after former Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon announced his resignation and criticized both Anthropic and OpenAI for continuing to develop increasingly powerful AI systems without enough safeguards. Coxon said the companies were racing toward self-improving artificial intelligence while taking serious risks with technology that could eventually become difficult for humans to control.
His comments quickly attracted support from other people working at Anthropic. Researchers including Anna Wang, Drake Thomas, Samuel Marks and Evan Hubinger have publicly expressed similar concerns about the pace of AI development and the possibility of severe consequences if more advanced systems become difficult to control.
Hubinger, who works in AI alignment at Anthropic, has said he personally believes there is a greater than 10% chance that AI could contribute to human extinction within the next decade.
Researchers Warn AI Development Is Moving Too Fast
The researchers’ concerns focus largely on the possibility that future AI systems could become much more capable and autonomous than today’s models.
Coxon said the companies developing advanced AI are moving toward self-improving systems without having enough confidence that humans will be able to remain in control. He argued that the potential consequences are too serious to justify continuing at the current pace without stronger safety measures.
Anna Wang, who works on artificial general intelligence safety at Anthropic, has also questioned whether researchers currently have a workable scientific plan for managing the risks associated with recursively self-improving AI.
“There is not yet a viable scientific plan to solve risks from recursively self-improving AI,” Wang wrote in a post cited by The Guardian.
Drake Thomas, another Anthropic employee, similarly said that AI development was moving too quickly and that researchers do not yet have the level of confidence they would want before the arrival of artificial superintelligence.
Samuel Marks, who works on safety research at Anthropic, also said AI developers believe their technology could potentially lead to extremely serious outcomes, including human extinction, within the next few years.
These comments point to a growing disagreement within the AI industry. Some researchers believe companies should continue developing increasingly powerful systems while improving safeguards at the same time. Others argue that safety research should move ahead of capability development, particularly if future systems can operate more independently or improve their own capabilities.
Elon Musk Calls the Warnings a ‘Psyop’
Elon Musk has pushed back against the growing warnings. In posts on X, Musk described the recent wave of concern as a possible “psyop”, or psychological operation, suggesting that the campaign could be intended to influence public opinion and create support for stricter AI regulation.
Musk was responding to posts questioning the circumstances surrounding Coxon’s resignation and the attention his comments received online.
One theory suggested that the controversy could be part of a broader public relations campaign aimed at increasing support for government regulation of AI. Musk appeared to give that argument more attention by describing the situation as a possible setup.
Coxon rejected the suggestion that his warnings were part of a coordinated campaign. He defended his decision to leave Anthropic and said his concerns about AI safety were genuine.
The disagreement highlights a wider divide among technology leaders and researchers. Some people in the industry believe fears about AI extinction are exaggerated or speculative. Others argue that even a relatively small possibility of catastrophic failure should be taken seriously because of the potential consequences.
Anthropic Says AI Brings Both Benefits and Risks
Anthropic has defended its approach to AI development while acknowledging that increasingly capable systems create new risks.
In a statement reported by The Guardian, the company said it has been transparent about the possibility that AI could bring both major benefits and unprecedented risks. Anthropic also said it continues to build models with strong safeguards.
The company’s position is important because the latest warnings are coming from researchers who are closely connected to the development and safety testing of advanced AI systems.
Anthropic has invested heavily in AI safety and alignment research. However, its researchers’ public comments show that there is still disagreement over whether existing safeguards are enough as AI capabilities improve.
The debate is also becoming less theoretical as AI systems gain the ability to perform more complex tasks, use tools and operate with less direct human involvement.
Anthropic Report Adds to the Safety Debate
The discussion comes at a time when Anthropic itself is reporting real-world attempts to misuse its AI systems.
In its September 2026 Threat Intelligence Report, Anthropic said it had identified and disrupted malicious operations involving Claude between December 2025 and August 2026. The report covers seven areas of misuse, including cyber operations, surveillance, influence operations, scams and fraud, biological misuse, conventional weapons and illicit AI model distillation.
Some of the most serious cases involved biological research that could potentially support the development of biological weapons. Anthropic said it blocked requests related to gain-of-function research involving chikungunya and identified a researcher using Claude in work involving highly pathogenic avian influenza.
The company also reported cases involving cyberattacks and surveillance. In some operations, AI was used for multiple stages of cyber activity rather than simply answering individual questions. Anthropic said this represents a shift toward more automated and complex forms of AI misuse.
These cases do not prove that AI will cause human extinction. However, they demonstrate that increasingly capable AI systems are already being used in high-risk activities, adding to concerns about how much autonomy future systems could have.
AI Safety Debate Is Becoming More Divisive
The disagreement between Anthropic researchers and critics such as Musk reflects a much larger argument over the future of artificial intelligence.
One side argues that advanced AI could bring major scientific and economic benefits and that slowing development could prevent society from gaining those benefits. Supporters of this view generally believe safety measures can be improved alongside the technology.
The other side argues that some risks may become much harder to manage once AI systems reach higher levels of autonomy and intelligence. Researchers in this group believe companies should consider slowing development until there is greater confidence that advanced systems can be controlled. The debate is likely to continue as AI companies compete to build more capable models.
For Anthropic, the issue is particularly notable because the company has positioned AI safety as a central part of its work. The public warnings from its own researchers show that even organizations focused heavily on AI safety are still debating how fast development should proceed.
As AI systems become more capable, the central question may no longer be simply what these systems can do. It may also be whether researchers can develop reliable safeguards quickly enough to keep pace with their growing capabilities.