In the Loop: Is AI Making the Next Pandemic More Likely?
Welcome back to In the Loop, TIME’s new twice-weekly newsletter about AI. Starting today, we’ll be publishing these editions both as stories on Time.com and as emails. If you’re reading this in your browser, why not subscribe to have the next one delivered straight to your inbox?
What to Know
If you talk to staff at the top AI labs, you’ll hear a lot of stories about how the future could go fantastically well—or terribly badly. And of all the ways that AI might cause harm to the human race, there’s one that scientists in the industry are particularly worried about today. That’s the possibility of AI helping bad actors to start a new pandemic. “You could try to synthesize something like COVID or a more dangerous version of the flu—and basically, our modeling suggests that this might be possible,” Anthropic’s chief scientist, Jared Kaplan, told me in May.
[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]Measuring the risk — In a new study published this morning, and shared exclusively with TIME ahead of its release, we got the first hard numbers on how experts think the risk of a new pandemic might have increased thanks to AI. The Forecasting Research Institute polled experts earlier this year, asking them how likely a human-caused pandemic might be—and how likely it might become if humans had access to AI that could reliably give advice on how to build a bioweapon.
What they found — Experts, who were polled between December and February, put the risk of a human-caused pandemic at 0.3% per year. But, they said, that risk would jump fivefold, to 1.5% per year, if AI were able to provide human-level virology advice.
You can guess where this is going — Then, in April, the researchers tested today’s AI tools on a new virology troubleshooting benchmark. They found that today’s AI tools outperform PhD-level virologists at complex troubleshooting tasks in the lab. In other words, AI can now do the very thing that forecasters warned would increase the risk of a human-caused pandemic fivefold.
We just published the full story on Time.com—you can read it here.
Who to Know
Person in the news – Matthew Prince, CEO of Cloudflare.
Since its founding in 2009, Cloudflare has been protecting sites on the internet from being knocked offline by large influxes of traffic, or indeed coordinated attacks. Now, some 20% of the internet is covered by its network. And today, Cloudflare announced that this network would begin to block AI crawlers by default — essentially putting a fifth of the internet behind a paywall for the bots that harvest info to train AIs like ChatGPT and Claude.
Step back — Today’s AI is so powerful because it has essentially inhaled the whole of the internet — from my articles to your profile photos. By running neural networks over that data using immense quantities of computing power, AI companies have taught these systems the texture of the world at such an enormous scale that it has given rise to new AI capabilities, like the ability to answer questions on almost any topic, or to generate photorealistic images. But this scraping has sparked a huge backlash from publishers, artists and writers, who complain that it has been done without any consent or compensation.
A new model — Cloudflare says the move will “fundamentally change how AI companies access web content going forward.” Major publishers, including TIME, have expressed their support for the shift toward an “opt-in” rather than an “opt-out” system, the company says. Cloudflare also says it is working on a new initiative, called Pay Per Crawl, in which creators will have the option of setting a price on their data in return for making it available to train AI.
Fighting words — Prince was not available for an interview this week. But at a recent conference, he disclosed that traffic to news sites had dropped precipitously across the board thanks to AI, in a shift that many worry will imperil the existence of the free press. “I go to war every single day with the Chinese government, the Russian government, the Iranians, the North Koreans, probably Americans, the Israelis — all of them who are trying to hack into our customer sites,” Prince said. “And you’re telling me I can’t stop some nerd with a C-corporation in Palo Alto?”
AI in Action
61% percent of U.S. adults have used AI in the last six months, and 19% interact with it daily, according to a new survey of AI adoption by the venture capital firm Menlo Ventures.
But just 3% percent of those users pay for access to the software, Menlo estimated based on the survey’s results—suggesting 97% of users only use the free tier of AI tools.
AI usage figures are higher for Americans in the workforce than other groups. Some 75% of employed adults have used AI in the last six months, including 26% who report using it daily, according to the survey. Students also report high AI usage: 85% have used it in the last six months, and 22% say they use it daily.
The statistics seem to suggest that some students and workers are growing dependent on free AI tools—a usage pattern that might become lucrative if AI companies were to begin restricting access or raising prices. However, the proliferation of open-source AI models has created intense price competition that may limit any single company’s ability to dramatically increase their costs.
As always, if you have an interesting story of AI in Action, we’d love to hear it. Email us at: intheloop@time.com
What we’re reading
‘The Dead Have Never Been This Talkative’: The Rise of AI Resurrection by Tharin Pillay in TIME
With the rise of image-to-video tools like the newest version of Midjourney, the world recently crossed a threshold: it’s now possible, in just a few clicks, to reanimate a photo of your dead relative. You can train a chatbot on snippets of their writing to replicate their patterns of speech; if you have a long enough clip of them speaking, you can also replicate their voice. Will these tools make it easier to process the heart-rending pain of bereavement? Or might their allure in fact make it harder to move forward? My colleague Tharin published a deeply insightful piece last week about the rise of this new technology. It’s certainly a weird time to be alive. Or, indeed, to be dead.