Claim · 2025-04-15 · publication · Stated in source · Supported

The essay by Narayanan and Kapoor of 15 April 2025 argues that AI can remain under human control without drastic interventions and that catastrophic misalignment is by far the most speculative of the risks it discusses.

One recorded claim. The claim panel gives its qualification, the source passages with their place in each source, and how it was checked.

What it connects

AI as Normal Technology → contests → Existential risk from misalignment or loss of control

Where it appears

Arguments about catastrophic risk from advanced AI →

Claim and evidence

AI as Normal Technologycontests ↓Existential risk from misalignment or loss of control

Machine-checked, not reviewed by an editorStated in sourceSupported

Supporting evidence: primary · 1 source

Date: 2025-04-15 · publication Records dated 2025 →
Role: Contesting
Register (kind of text): Nonfiction
Engagement: Engages a premise. Disputes the premise that capability gains must translate into power that escapes control, placing the intervention at limiting power rather than at alignment.

Scope and limitsThe essay defines a speculative risk as one with epistemic uncertainty about whether the true risk is zero; it does not state that the risk is zero.

The evidence 02

primary sourceSupports the claim

AI as Normal Technology

Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University (knightcolumbia.org) · 2025-04-15

Cite the original source

Cite the original document, not Selekoa. Check these details against it.

Source excerpt

“We view AI as a tool that we can and should remain in control of, and we argue that this goal does not require drastic policy interventions or technical breakthroughs.”

Location in source Introduction

How it was read Retrieved directly from the publisher

Machine-checked · 2026-10-31

Source details and check notes

Authors: Arvind Narayanan; Sayash Kapoor
Version: Retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29 (SHA-256 6122c2bd36f2b2e229e352c82f61ae0d93625a77888af892d9409d91b9ad1a16). Current web essay dated April 15, 2025. The cross-family check retrieved it again on 2026-10-31, with the same bytes.
Canonical address: Open the canonical source ↗
Accessed: 2026-10-29
Language: English (en)
Attribution: Arvind Narayanan, Sayash Kapoor, “AI as Normal Technology”, 2025-04-15.
Reuse: No open redistribution licence asserted. Bibliographic metadata, editorial paraphrases and short attributed quotations (at most 50 words each). Recheck terms before wider redistribution.
Check notes: Candidate pack passage, arguments about catastrophic risk from advanced AI (research/risk-debate). The quotation (30 words) matched the text retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29. Matching ignored differences of whitespace, case, quotation marks, dashes and Unicode compatibility forms, so the source’s typography can differ. No human editorial review.

primary sourceSupports the claim

AI as Normal Technology

Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University (knightcolumbia.org) · 2025-04-15

Cite the original source

Cite the original document, not Selekoa. Check these details against it.

Source excerpt

“In the view of AI as normal technology, catastrophic misalignment is (by far) the most speculative of the risks that we discuss.”

Location in source Part III, "Catastrophic misalignment is a speculative risk"

How it was read Retrieved directly from the publisher

Machine-checked · 2026-10-31

Source details and check notes

Authors: Arvind Narayanan; Sayash Kapoor
Version: Retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29 (SHA-256 6122c2bd36f2b2e229e352c82f61ae0d93625a77888af892d9409d91b9ad1a16). Current web essay dated April 15, 2025. The cross-family check retrieved it again on 2026-10-31, with the same bytes.
Canonical address: Open the canonical source ↗
Accessed: 2026-10-29
Language: English (en)
Attribution: Arvind Narayanan, Sayash Kapoor, “AI as Normal Technology”, 2025-04-15.
Reuse: No open redistribution licence asserted. Bibliographic metadata, editorial paraphrases and short attributed quotations (at most 50 words each). Recheck terms before wider redistribution.
Check notes: Candidate pack passage, arguments about catastrophic risk from advanced AI (research/risk-debate). The quotation (22 words) matched the text retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29. Matching ignored differences of whitespace, case, quotation marks, dashes and Unicode compatibility forms, so the source’s typography can differ. No human editorial review.

Status and meaning

Editorial status. Not reviewed by an editor. An exploratory record that no editor has accepted. This status does not say whether a person has read any linked passage. Each evidence record above shows how it was checked.

Relation. A passage of the document disputes the proposition or a premise it depends on. The record documents the text’s position, not who is right.

Date. Date of publication, as the source gives it.

Record ID rd-r08-narayanan-kapoor-2025-normal-technology