Your Undivided Attention

On October 11, 1986, Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev met at Höfði House in Reykjavik, Iceland, to confront the threat hanging over both their nations: the nuclear arms race. The summit was hastily arranged, light on ceremony, and ended without a deal. But today it’s seen as the moment that upended the game theory of the Cold War. A year later, the two leaders signed the first treaty to eliminate an entire class of nuclear weapons.
Forty years to the day, Tristan and Aza joined 15 world leaders at Höfði House, including Icelandic President Halla Tómasdóttir, for a dialogue on global coordination around AI. It capped a weekend in Reykjavik where leaders, diplomats, and policymakers had candid conversations about the AI future we’re headed toward, and made commitments to steer toward a better one.
The 1986 Reykjavik meeting didn’t end the nuclear arms race. It made ending it imaginable. That’s exactly the moment we need today with AI.
In this episode, Tristan and Aza sit down with President Tómasdóttir to discuss what happened in Reykjavik and what it means for our future.
Note: This episode was recorded on Monday, 10/12.
RECOMMENDED MEDIA
Stream The AI Doc on Netflix
President Tómasdóttir’s “Call for Responsible Leadership in Turbulent Times”​​​​‌‍​‍​‍‌‍‌​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌‌‍‍‌‌‍‍​‍​‍​‍‍​‍​‍‌​‌‍​‌‌‍‍‌‍‍‌‌‌​‌‍‌​‍‍‌‍‍‌‌‍​‍​‍​‍​​‍​‍‌‍‍​‌​‍‌‍‌‌‌‍‌‍​‍​‍​‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‍​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌​​‍​‍‌‍‌‍‌‍‌​‍‌​‌‍‌‌‌‌​‌‍‍‌​‍‌‌‍‍‌‌​‌‍​‌‍​‌‌‍‍‌‍‌​‌​​‍‍‌‌‍‌‍‌‌‌​‍‌‍​‌‍‌‌‌‍​​‍‍‌‍​‌‌​​‌​​​‍‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‍‌​‌‍‍‌‌‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‍‌‌​‌‍‌‌‌‍‍‌‌​​‍‌‍‌‌‌‍‌​‌‍‍‌‌‌​​‍‌‍‌‌‍‌‍‌​‌‍‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‍‌‍‌‌‌​‌‍‌‌‌‍‍‌‌​‌‍​‌‌‌​‌‍‍‌‌‍‌‍‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‌‌‍‌​​​‌​‍​‌‍​‍​‌‌‍‌‌​‍‌‌‍​‌​‍‌​​‍​‍​​‌​​​​‍‌​‌​‌‍​​​‌‌‍‌‍​‍‌‌‍​‍‌‍​‌‍‌​​​‌​‍‌​‌‍​‌‌​​‌‍‌‍‌‍‌‌​‌​‌​​​​​‍​‌‍​‍‌​​​​‍‌‌​‌‍‌‌​​‌‍‌‌​‌‌‍‍‌‍‌‌‌‌‌​​‍‌​​‌‍​‌‌‌​‌‍‍​​‌‌‌​‌‍‍‌‌‌​‌‍​‌‍‌‌​‌‍​‍‌‍​‌‌​‌‍‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‍‌‍​​‌‌‍‍​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌​​‍‌‌​​‍‌​‌‍​‍‌‌​​‍‌​‌‍‌‍‌‍‌‍‌​‍‌​‌‍‌‌‌‌​‌‍‍‌​‍‌‌‍‍‌‌​‌‍​‌‍​‌‌‍‍‌‍‌​‌​​‍‍‌‌‍‌‍‌‌‌​‍‌‍​‌‍‌‌‌‍​​‍‍‌‍​‌‌​​‌​​​‍‌‌​​‍‌​‌‍‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‍‌​‌‍‍‌‌‍​‍‌‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‌‌‍‌​​​‌​‍​‌‍​‍​‌‌‍‌‌​‍‌‌‍​‌​‍‌​​‍​‍​​‌​​​​‍‌​‌​‌‍​​​‌‌‍‌‍​‍‌‌‍​‍‌‍​‌‍‌​​​‌​‍‌​‌‍​‌‌​​‌‍‌‍‌‍‌‌​‌​‌​​​​​‍​‌‍​‍‌​​​​‍‌‍‌‌​‌‍‌‌​​‌‍‌‌​‌‌‍‍‌‍‌‌‌‌‌​​‍‌‍‌​​‌‍​‌‌‌​‌‍‍​​‌‌‌​‌‍‍‌‌‌​‌‍​‌‍‌‌​‍‌‍‌​​‌‍‌‌‌​‍‌​‌​​‌‍‌‌‌‍​‌‌​‌‍‍‌‌‌‍‌‍‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌‍​‍‌‍​‌‍‍‌‌​‌‍‍​‌‍‌‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍‌‌
The METR investigation of the Hugging Face incident.

Finnish President Stubb and Norwegian Prime Minister Støre's "call for enhanced control of AI development"
Rent or buy "The Brink of War"
RECOMMENDED YUA EPISODES
We Need AI Treaties. This is How We Get Them
A Conversation with the Team Behind "The AI Doc"
America and China Are Racing to Different AI Futures
What Would It Take to Actually Trust Each Other? The Game Theory Dilemma
Corrections
Tristan referred to Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev as “the two presidents.” Gorbachev was Soviet General Secretary. He was not made President of the USSR until 1989.
Tristan referred to The Day After as the largest television event in history. It is actually the second-largest non-sports TV event, after the series finale of MASH.
The 50 petabytes figure for the OpenAI swarm investigation refers to the full archive OpenAI is searching related to the Hugging Face incident, including training and eval records, rather than just the swarm’s communication.
Aza mistakenly referred to the 1986 Reykjavik “accord.” The leaders did not leave the meeting with an accord.
The Stubb/Støre statement was signed by 22 leaders from 20 countries, not by 22 countries as Tristan said.
The quote from Postman is “clarity is courage,” not “clarity creates courage,” as Aza said.





Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

It’s been a whirlwind week in AI news. Weeks after a series of hacking incidents by rogue agents at OpenAI and Anthropic, we’ve seen a cascade of top AI researchers blow the whistle on what they call the catastrophic and even existential risks posed by the current pace of development. Then, over the weekend, Dario Amodei called for a slowdown in AI research — a call that was echoed by his competitors Sam Altman and Elon Musk.
If you’re feeling both concerned and hopeful at this moment, you’re not alone. Real threats are opening the door for real change. Tristan and Aza are going out into the world, talking to the media, technologists, and policymakers to turn this momentum into action.
Today on the show, Tristan shares how he’s feeling in this critical moment, breaks down the headlines from an insider's perspective, and points to tangible steps we can take right now to avoid the worst-case scenario.
You probably have questions about what’s happening. Good news: Tristan and Aza are gearing up for their annual Ask Us Anything episode. Pull out your phone, record your question, and send it to undivided@humanetech.com.
CORRECTIONS
The quote from Ajeya Cotra that Tristan cites is from her personal Substack, not the official METR report. She is also one of three contributors to the report, not the sole author.
Tristan incorrectly referred to Dario Amodei’s warning that an AI swarm could “take down” the internet. His actual phrasing was “take over” the internet.
President Trump’s call-in to the All In Summit occurred on Monday, 9/14, not Sunday, 9/13.

RECOMMENDED MEDIA
Watch “The AI Doc” on Netflix
Sign The Pro-Human AI Declaration
METR’s investigation of the Hugging Face incident
Dario Amodei’s call to “Pace the Frontier”
The Pacing the Frontier Open Letter
“On the Loose” by Dean Ball

"An Alien Mind" by Jakub Pachoki
"AI May Become the Third Superpower" by Paul Tudor Jones

RECOMMENDED YUA EPISODES
“Rogue AI” Used to be a Science Fiction Trope. Not Anymore.
The Self-Preserving Machine: Why AI Learns to Deceive
Daniel Kokotajlo Forecasts the End of Human Dominance
Former OpenAI Engineer William Saunders on Silence, Safety, and the Right to Warn
Mustafa Suleyman Says We Need to Contain AI. How Do We Do It?







Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In a 2018 TED Talk, Yuval Harari argued that democracy prevailed over fascism and communism in the 20th century not because of any inherent advantage, but because the technology of that age favored open and democratic societies. It was simply too difficult and too costly to centralize power using pre-digital technology.
But, Yuval warned, with the rise of AI, the calculus might flip: it might actually become far more efficient to run highly centralized authoritarian governments.
Eight years later, we're starting to see what Yuval was warning about. Right now, police across all levels of government, from small-town sheriffs to massive federal agencies, are adopting AI at a staggering rate and using it to build the kind of efficient, centralized surveillance-state apparatus that Yuval warned about.
Take, for example, the recent deployment of hundreds of thousands of automated license plate readers (ALPRs) across the country by companies like Flock and Axon. These cameras have made headlines in recent weeks, but as you’ll hear in this episode, they are just the most visible frontier of an AI-powered digital dragnet that gives police the ability to analyze extraordinary amounts of data about private citizens.
Today on the show, Tristan speaks with two experts on how police are using AI technology today, what we can expect in the near future, and what protections we need to create now before it's too late.
Andrew Guthrie Ferguson is a law professor at George Washington University who studies how policing technology collides with constitutional law. He's the author of Your Data Will Be Used Against You: Policing in the Age of Self-Surveillance.
Garance Burke is an investigative journalist at The Associated Press, where she leads high-impact projects on the intersection of technology and society. Her investigations into the global surveillance industry were part of a package that won the 2026 Pulitzer Prize for International Reporting.

RECOMMENDED MEDIA
Your Data Will Be Used Against You by Andrew Guthrie Ferguson
Yuval Noah Harari’s 2018 TED talk: “Why fascism is so tempting -- and how your data could power it”

The full series of AP stories produced by Grance Burke and her Pulitzer Prize-winning colleagues
Further reading on Estonia’s data tracker tool

RECOMMENDED YUA EPISODES
Why Are Migrants Becoming AI Test Subjects? With Petra Molnar
America and China Are Racing to Different AI Futures
Laughing at Power: A Troublemaker’s Guide to Changing Tech

Corrections
Andrew said that real-time crime centers are in 300 cities across the US, which matches the findings of the National Real Time Crime Center Association; however, this figure is disputed, with the Electronic Frontier Foundation putting it at 150.
Andrew incorrectly described the resolution of the case of a man misidentified by AI in New Orleans. He said the man was acquitted, but in fact the charges were dropped.

Clarifications
As noted in the episode, Andrew’s discussion of agentic AI was a theoretical account of a tool that police may use in the future, not something actively used on the ground today.
Garance referred to the protests in Ferguson as the impetus for police-worn body cameras. Body cameras were being piloted in the US and UK prior to Ferguson, but federal grants in the wake of the protests made them much more common.






Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In AI, what gets measured gets optimized. Right now, we're spending all our efforts to measure how capable and powerful models are, narrowly optimizing for those metrics while ignoring downstream consequences.

What if we could flip this dynamic on its head? What if, instead of what AI can do, we start to measure what AI does to us? What if, instead of races to the bottom on capabilities and engagement, we could incentivize races to the top on safety, or better yet, on making us more resilient and developed human beings?

That’s the mission of CHT’s Humane Evals program: we're bringing together researchers, psychologists, engineers, and technologists from across the entire AI ecosystem and beyond to build out the expertise and infrastructure we need to measure AI's impact on humans.

Today on the show, Aza Raskin explores the Humane Evals project with Imran Khan, a researcher and strategist who's been leading CHT's efforts in this area, and Jared Moore, a computer scientist and researcher who's been at the forefront of measuring AI's psychological impact on users.

If this sounds like something you're interested in working on, you can email us at evals@humanetech.com.



RECOMMENDED MEDIA

You can read more about Jared’s work at his website.

Related pieces by Imran on the CHT Substack:

What is AI doing to humans? Why aren’t we measuring it?

Will Human-Like AI Hijack Human Psychology?

A Black Box Problem: Missing Data On How AI Affects the Human Mind

The website for the UC Berkeley Center for the Science of Psychedelics

KoraBench, the child safety AI benchmark that Imran referenced



RECOMMENDED YUA EPISODES

The AI Dilemma

Attachment Hacking and the Rise of AI Psychosis

How OpenAI's ChatGPT Guided a Teen to His Death



Corrections:

Aza gave the wrong year for Sewell Setzer’s death. It was in 2024, not 2025.

Aza referred to Joseph Henrich as an evolutionary psychologist; he was actually a biological anthropologist.

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

It feels like we’re stuck in an endless debate about what AI is going to mean for jobs and the economy. The prediction you hear from the people closest to the technology — both its critics and its boosters — is that mass automation is coming, and with it mass unemployment. In response, some AI CEOs are promising a post-labor Golden Age of abundance and universal high income. But you also hear from some techno-optimists and economists that AI will create more jobs than it destroys and that society’s fears are unjustified.

When these arguments are traded back and forth, no one can know what’s actually true, and nothing happens. And caught in the middle of this debate are actual workers trying to figure out what this means for their family and themselves, or whether their kids should go to college. And as long as that debate stays alive, nobody plans or takes action ahead of what’s coming.

So this week on Your Undivided Attention, rather than continuing to referee this debate, we follow the incentives and show you where they’re actually taking us in the very near future.

Our guest, economist Molly Kinder, argues that we’re entering what she calls the “messy middle”: a period of concentrated and uneven workforce disruption. She has evidence-based arguments about where, specifically, AI will affect the labor force, what the second and third-order consequences of those effects might be, and what we need to do today to protect people’s livelihoods.

Molly recently left her position as a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution to become the founding CEO of a new organization dedicated to addressing AI’s impact on jobs. Her Substack, Kinder Futures: Dispatches on AI, Work & What Comes Next, features some of the clearest-eyed analysis of AI’s impact on the economy.

RECOMMENDED MEDIA

Kinder Futures: Dispatches on AI, Work & What Comes Next (Molly’s Substack)

Molly’s blog posts at Brookings

The Yale Budget Lab’s AI Labor Market Tracker

RECOMMENDED YUA EPISODES

AI and the Future of Work: What You Need to Know

Is AI Productivity Worth Our Humanity? with Prof. Michael Sandel

AI and Jobs: How to Make AI Work With Us, Not Against Us with Daron Acemoglu

 

Corrections

Molly incorrectly referred to cuts to “Medicare for the neediest populations.” The cuts she describes are to Medicaid.

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.