DeepMind's Demis Hassabis pushes for US-led AI standards body as AGI looms within years

DeepMind CEO calls for an independent standards body to regulate frontier AI

In an X post on Tuesday morning, Google DeepMind CEO Demis Hassabis called for the creation of a new regulatory body to oversee frontier model releases. Titled "A Framework for Frontier AI and the Dawning of a New Age," the post makes the case for a "standards body" modeled after the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), which could test frontier models and develop best practices for their release. "Initially, Frontier Labs would voluntarily share models with the Standards Body for review up to 30 days before release," the post reads. "Once the assessment protocol is shown to be effective and robust, formalisation could quickly follow, meaning that Frontier Models would be required to pass it to be deployed in the US market. Labs would also work with the Standards Body to address any critical post-release vulnerabilities." The proposed system would build on the ad hoc reviews performed by the US government on Anthropic's Mythos and OpenAI's Sol. Those reviews drew significant criticism for lack of technical expertise and opaque decision-making as to when a model could be released. Under Hassabis's proposed regulator, those decisions could be handed off to a new organization, backed by the US government but funded by the AI industry and operated independently. The prospect of AI regulation remains controversial for both the tech industry and the Trump Administration. Most recently, White House AI advisor and a16z general partner Sriram Krishnan discounted the possibility of an AI regulator within the executive branch, saying "there will not be an FDA for AI." Establishing the standards body as a self-regulatory organization like FINRA could be a way to address those concerns. Hassabis envisions the regulator being staffed by open-source representatives and technical experts from within the industry, along with the financial backing from AI labs that would be necessary to retain them. They could even outsource some evaluations to the growing pool of AI safety groups who would be able to specialize in specific risks. "The strength of this approach is it would be technically focused, while at the same time supporting innovation and incentivising responsible behaviour," Hassabis argues. "It is designed to keep up with the field's acceleration and adapt to the biggest risks as they are identified, and could be ratcheted up if the seriousness of the situation demands."

Google's Demis Hassabis says it's time for a global AI watchdog -- led by the US

Demis Hassabis thinks the world needs an AI watchdog with the power to hit the brakes if frontier models become too dangerous. Writing in a blog post, the Google DeepMind CEO and cofounder said the US should lead the initiative, arguing that the country is the best placed to set global standards "given its economic and technical standing." The organization, which could resemble existing regulators like the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, would be made up of leading independent experts and representatives from open source communities, and would have the authority to evaluate frontier models before they are released and coordinate an industry-wide slowdown if they were judged too risky to deploy. The blog, titled "A Framework for Frontier AI and the Dawning of a New Age," argued that the need for global regulation is becoming more urgent as AI systems grow in sophistication. Artificial general intelligence (AGI) "is probably only a few short years away," he said. "When we look back on this time in the decades to come, I think we will realise we were standing in the foothills of the singularity - nothing less than the dawning of a new age for humanity." According to Axios, Hassabis has spent months quietly building support for his proposal, including briefing the Trump administration, other AI labs, and European officials, and hopes to have the new organisation up and running before the end of the year. He told Axios that "the noises I've been hearing [from the Trump administration] are very positive." The proposal is the latest effort by Hassabis and other industry leaders to establish a coherent framework for governing increasingly powerful AI systems, as well as mitigate the risks they may pose. As of yet, there is no global set of rules governing AI specifically, nor a comprehensive set of rules nationally in the US. Hassabis, the joint winner of the 2024 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for his work on AI-based protein prediction, also signed his name to a statement calling for tougher protections against AI-aided bioweapons production last month. Hassabis' most recent comments follow a statement from top economists and tech titans -- including Anthropic cofounder Jack Clark and former Google CEO Eric Schmidt -- urging world leaders to take the looming economic impacts of AI seriously.

DeepMind bigbrain calls for America to set AI standards before it's too late

Google DeepMind boss Demis Hassabis is calling for the US to establish a robust frontier AI model review process because, according to him, artificial general intelligence (AGI) "is probably only a few short years away" and we've got to figure it out before it's too late. That "probably" is doing a lot of heavy lifting in Hassabis' lengthy, early-morning Tuesday post on X. Like commercially viable fusion power and practical fault-tolerant quantum computing, AGI seems perpetually asymptotic to the present moment, with needed technological advancements always the next step in the process. No amount of hyperbole - not even a Nobel laureate with skin in the game predicting an impact "perhaps 10x of the Industrial Revolution at 10x the speed" - makes the AGI timetable any more certain. Recall that Hassabis predicted in the beginning of 2025 that human trials of AI-designed drugs would come that year, and that still hasn't happened either. Regardless of the questionable prognostications, the main argument in Hassabis' essay - that we need to establish international standards for classifying AI safety and risk - is worth serious discussion, and his arguments for it are sensible. "I'm confident that mitigating the technical risks related to AI is a challenge we can collectively address, but only if we give ourselves the time and space to get this next crucial step right," Hassabis said. "Currently, as a field and as a wider society, we aren't doing that." He's got that right, at least. Hassabis proposes that the US ought to create a new standards body to evaluate frontier AI models in the same vein as the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), the private, industry-funded self-regulatory organization that oversees US broker-dealers under SEC supervision and is charged with protecting investors and safeguarding market integrity. The DeepMind CEO's vision for an AI industry regulatory authority would begin with a board of tech experts and open-source representatives funded by the AI industry itself - a move that would "attract world-class technical talent" and ensure the body had enough hardware to run its various frontier model tests. FINRA is funded in a similar manner by the industry it purports to regulate, which has opened the door to criticism that it's basically a toothless insiders' club. Funding and conflict-of-interest concerns aside, the main task of the AI standards body Hassabis proposed would be to establish an assessment protocol for frontier AI models, and to determine what qualifies as a frontier model based on benchmarks it would also be responsible for setting. "Organisations with 'Frontier Models' as defined by those benchmarks would be deemed 'Frontier Labs', and be encouraged to adopt best practices, such as publishing model cards with technical details, maintaining strong internal cybersecurity, vetting key personnel, and providing sufficient resourcing for safety and security research, and more," Hassabis explained. Hassabis proposed that submitting to such evaluations would be voluntary for frontier labs, at least at first - the model he proposes would give labs the option to voluntarily submit models for review 30 days before release until whatever assessment protocol the group makes up proves to be effective. He further proposes that frontier labs should be allowed to help the standards body develop those benchmarks - again, at least for a while until it gets up to speed. "Eventually the Standards Body should build up the technical capacity to create its own held-out tests independent of the Labs to prevent overfitting." The hope is that this US-led effort would eventually lead to international frontier AI assessment standards, though whether the international community would stomach another imposition of US rules on the global stage is questionable at this point. The Trump administration has already proposed something similar for testing frontier AI models before their broader release. President Trump signed an executive order in early June directing the National Institute of Standards and Technology, alongside several other federal agencies, to develop a voluntary framework that would allow the government to review covered frontier models for up to 30 days before they are shared with select trusted partners. The effort is primarily aimed at evaluating advanced cybersecurity capabilities, and the order also calls for the development of classified benchmarks for assessing frontier AI models. Some critics argued the framework could give the government undue influence over which companies receive early access to frontier models, pointing to provisions governing collaboration with "select trusted partners." An independent standards body could avoid some of those concerns. Given concerns that financial industry pressure affects the outcome of FINRA work, however, even an independent AI standards body may not be enough to prevent financial influence from skewing its decisions. "The future is not yet written," Hassabis concluded in his note. "We must use this precious window before AGI arrives to shape this technology for the benefit of all humanity." Whether or not AGI is actually coming, the AI industry definitely needs someone to kick it into shape. The question of who can do it fairly - the industry itself or the government - isn't one that's been adequately answered yet. ®

DeepMind chief Demis Hassabis calls for US-led body to test 'frontier' AI models

Google DeepMind chief executive Demis Hassabis has called for the creation of a US-led standards body to test new "frontier-class" AI models for national security threats, arguing that "urgent action" from international regulators is needed to address the risks posed by the rapidly advancing technology. The warning from Hassabis, a Nobel laureate who leads Google's AI efforts, follows the White House's abrupt export ban on Anthropic's most advanced models last month, alongside a fresh wave of warnings about the potential for AI to disrupt the global economy and financial system. The intervention is the most detailed proposal yet for AI regulation from Google, which is vying for AI leadership with Anthropic and OpenAI. "We've already seen the challenges frontier models pose for cybersecurity, and other threats including nuclear and bio risks may soon emerge as capabilities continue to advance," Hassabis wrote in an essay published on social media app X on Tuesday. "The rapid progress we're seeing in AI requires a new approach to testing frontier AI model capabilities that is dynamic, adaptable, and rigorous. The US is well positioned, given its economic and technical standing, to take the first step in developing such a framework." Hassabis proposes that the new body could be modelled on the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (Finra), the US-based self-regulatory organisation that oversees capital markets to protect investors. AI models designated as "frontier-class" -- including both open and closed systems developed anywhere -- would be vetted. He suggested the body should also stress-test AI models' safety guardrails. A warning from Amazon that guardrails on Anthropic's powerful Mythos model could be bypassed helped to prompt the US ban. "This US-initiated effort would provide a strong starting point for creating shared international standards on Frontier AI," Hassabis said, adding that it should then "spur the international community to reach a consensus" on AI regulation. Hassabis's move follows escalating calls by Anthropic chief executive Dario Amodei for stronger AI regulations, including allowing the government to block deployment of technology that is deemed unsafe. Last month, OpenAI also agreed to stagger the release of its latest model, GPT-5.6, following requests from the US government. Tech industry executives at the G7 meeting last month urged world leaders to take a united front on AI safety and security, after the US government's action against Anthropic prompted fears in Europe and Asia that they could be cut off from a vital engine of economic growth and military advantage. Discussion of AI regulation in the US has also intensified as Chinese capabilities improve. The latest open models from Z.ai and DeepSeek are narrowing the gap with their US rivals. Beyond the regulatory proposals, Hassabis' essay painted an optimistic future for AI, which he said could yield huge advances in medicine and energy. Artificial general intelligence that can match all the capabilities of the human brain was "probably only a few short years away", he added, offering a "precious window" for society to act. "The magnitude of this technology's impact will be unprecedented, perhaps 10x of the Industrial Revolution at 10x the speed," he wrote. "If you stop to think about it, we've essentially found a way to make sand think. It's miraculous."

Google DeepMind chief Demis Hassabis calls for U.S. to spearhead AI standards body

The chief of Google's AI division has called for the U.S. to spearhead a standards body that will oversee new AI models and assess national security risks including cybersecurity and biological threats. Google DeepMind boss Demis Hassabis, a Nobel laureate, said in an article posted on X on Tuesday that "urgent action" was needed to address risks associated with artificial general intelligence (AGI) -- the point at which AI matches or surpasses human intelligence. "We've already seen the challenges frontier models pose for cybersecurity, and other threats including nuclear and bio risks may soon emerge as capabilities continue to advance," he said. Hassabis proposed a U.S.-led public-private partnership overseen by the federal government as a solution to helping tackle these threats. The White House, the State Department and the Department of Commerce have been approached for comment. The comments come a month on from sources telling CNBC that Hassabis, alongside Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, called for a U.S.-led coalition to shape rules and standards around AI at a G7 meeting with tech leaders and heads of state that included President Donald Trump. OpenAI's Sam Altman also called for a similar body in an article published by the Financial Times earlier this month.

AI's biggest rivals converge on AI regulation

Google DeepMind's Demis Hassabis, OpenAI's Sam Altman and Anthropic's Dario Amodei have each published a plan to regulate frontier AI. They agree on the diagnosis, and split on how much power Washington should hold. The people building the most powerful AI rarely agree on much. This week, three of them agreed on one big thing. The frontier needs regulating, and soon. Over five weeks, the chiefs of Google DeepMind, OpenAI and Anthropic each published a memo on how to police the most capable AI models, Axios reported. Their diagnoses line up almost exactly. Where they agree All three want frontier models tested by independent outsiders before release. That breaks with the industry's old habit of self-reporting. All three also want a single body to set standards, certify compliance and restrict access to models judged too dangerous. They agree on who leads, too. Each wants the US in charge, rather than a patchwork of states or rival national rules. Each points to near-term national-security risks, from cyberattacks to bioweapons. And none calls for a broad crackdown. The target is the small class of the most powerful models. Where they split The rivals part ways on how hard the government should hold the button. Amodei, who has also urged a coordinated pause on frontier AI, wants an FAA for AI: a federal agency that can block a release outright. Hassabis wants a FINRA-style body, industry-funded but government-overseen, starting with voluntary reviews. Altman, writing in the Financial Times, wants an IAEA-style international forum that uses access to models and markets as leverage. A rare truce Hassabis's plan, published Tuesday, drew unusual praise across a bitterly competitive field. Altman called it "thoughtful." Microsoft's Satya Nadella said the goal was "a frontier ecosystem that promotes innovation and choice." Even Elon Musk, no friend of Altman's this week, called it "a good starting point." Anthropic's Jack Clark called the framework "excellent." The timing is not random. Over the same five weeks, Washington twice stepped in to restrict or delay frontier models, first Anthropic's Fable and Mythos, then OpenAI's GPT-5.6, over cyber fears. The Trump administration is publicly anti-regulation, but privately less sure a hands-off approach can hold. Meta's Mark Zuckerberg is said to be drafting a memo of his own. The catch Not everyone is cheering. OpenAI, Google and Anthropic already have the lawyers, security teams and Washington ties to handle a heavy certification process. Startups and open-source developers do not. Critics warn the result could be regulatory capture: safety rules that quietly entrench the biggest labs. It is the same set of rivals who sparred at the G7 weeks ago, now lobbying hardest for the rules.

Opinion | Good AI standards don't need a new government bureaucracy behind them

Demis Hassabis in Cannes, France, on June 24. (Shane Anthony Sinclair/Getty Images) Add Google DeepMind's Demis Hassabis to the chorus of frontier lab leaders asking for some artificial intelligence regulation. Hassabis advocates for a light touch in a creative proposal he posted this week on X. But tucked inside is a quiet invitation for the government to eventually do more -- and perhaps too much. AI is not a weapon to be licensed but a general-purpose technology, like computing itself. The best path to safety is to police the uses of such technologies, not the technologies themselves. Hassabis's proposal, on its face, is modest. The AI industry would fund an independent body of technical experts that, in collaboration with federal agencies and U.S. national labs, would develop rigorous tests for the most powerful models, probing what they can do in areas like hacking and biological research. Frontier AI companies would voluntarily submit their latest products for review before release. There would be no licensing regimes, and the government could not hold up deployment, at least initially. The industry, in other words, would prove it can write sound standards before anyone is asked to follow them. Hassabis compares his proposed body to the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, the organization Wall Street funds to police its own brokers. But Finra is a compliance body that has the Securities and Exchange Commission behind it. Membership is mandated by law. What would the AI equivalent be? Hassabis is vague. Once the suite of standards is proven to be robust, he says "formalisation could quickly follow," after which new models would "be required to pass" before they could be deployed in the U.S. Required by whom, and how? The proposal slips from a set of voluntary standards into what could easily end up as yet another regulatory bureaucracy that invites unhelpful government interference. Hassabis overly relies on the passive voice. The strictness of the regime "could be ratcheted up" as new risks emerge, he writes. He even muses about a coordinated slowdown in research "if deemed necessary." Again, by whom, and how? The proposal is strongest as a starting point to spur international discussions on setting standards. Beijing is also concerned about the risks posed by untested AI and vulnerable to these powerful tools falling into rogue hands. While there's no reason to trust China or its intentions, handshake agreements about technical standards and regular interactions between experts are on balance better than nothing. But turning industry standards into domestic regulations would be a mistake when the technology is developing so rapidly. The U.S. government might be tempted to assume that the size and attractiveness of the American market would compel the rest of the world to conform to whatever rules it comes up with. Europe made the same mistake in trying to regulate the internet. Doing so set back its innovators with compliance requirements and deprived its citizens of cutting-edge services. With a technology as revolutionary as AI, the cost of regulatory arrogance could be far greater. Whether or not Beijing plays ball with Washington, bioterror and cyberattack risks are real. For now, at least, a handful of U.S. companies have a monopoly on the most capable, and potentially dangerous, models. But policing the frontier is a temporary fix at best. More durable defenses lie elsewhere. The U.S. government can screen DNA synthesis orders, harden critical infrastructure and build bio-surveillance networks to thwart attacks, no matter whose model designs them. Gatekeeping the frontier models offers little more than Kabuki security theater. That's especially true because China's best models are quickly closing the gap with America's best. Open models and falling costs will put these capabilities everywhere within a few years. Any bureaucracy built to restrain frontier research in America risks becoming a permanent straitjacket.

Hassabis wants a FINRA-style referee for frontier AI

Demis Hassabis, the Nobel laureate behind Google's AI, says AGI is "a few short years away" and the world is not ready. His fix, laid out in a manifesto on Tuesday: a US-led Standards Body modelled on Wall Street's FINRA, funded by the labs, that vets frontier models before release and can coordinate an industry-wide slowdown if they get too dangerous. The man behind Google's AI thinks the world needs a referee. And he has drafted the rules. Demis Hassabis wants a US-led watchdog that vets frontier models before release. It is modelled on Wall Street's policeman, and it could slow the whole industry down. Demis Hassabis does not usually sound the alarm. On Tuesday he did. The Google DeepMind chief and Nobel laureate published a manifesto on X. In it, he argues that artificial general intelligence is "probably only a few short years away". The world, he says, is not ready. He calls this a "precious window" before AGI arrives, and it is closing. His fix is unusually concrete. He wants the US to build a new AI Standards Body. His template is FINRA, the industry-funded watchdog that polices Wall Street under government oversight. A referee for the frontier The body would be a public-private partnership, funded mostly by the labs themselves. Its board would be stacked with independent experts, Turing Award winners among them, plus open-source and government voices. Its job is to test the most powerful models before they ship. At first, labs would hand their systems over voluntarily, up to 30 days before release. The tests would probe the dangerous stuff: cyber-attack skill, biological and nuclear risk, and signs of deception. Once the regime works, it would harden. A "Frontier-class" model would have to pass before it could reach the US market. The body would set the benchmarks and refresh them each quarter. The rules would apply to any such model, open or closed, wherever it is built. Startups and academics stay exempt. The power to pull the handbrake The most striking part is the brake. Hassabis says the body could be "ratcheted up" as risks grow. That includes "coordinating a slowdown in development among the Frontier Labs if deemed necessary". It is a remarkable thing for a lab boss to propose. He is asking for a mechanism to make his own industry stop. He told Axios, which broke the plan, that today's cyber-risks are only "warning shots". Within 18 months, he warned, far graver bio and nuclear tools could emerge. They could sit inside open-source models no government can recall. His timeline is aggressive. He wants the body running before year-end. He says he has briefed the Trump administration, rival labs, and European officials for months. The "noises", he said, are "very positive". Why now The timing is not an accident. Last month, the Trump administration froze Anthropic's most powerful models overnight with an export order. Weeks of tense negotiation followed, with no rulebook. Hassabis called that "a bit of a wake-up call". OpenAI, wary of the same fate, held back GPT-5.6 until the government signed off. He is not alone in wanting rules. He and Anthropic's Dario Amodei called for a US-led coalition at the G7. Amodei wants an FAA-style agency that can block unsafe models. The lab chiefs now agree Washington should regulate them. They differ mainly on who holds the gavel. Hassabis frames all of this in near-cosmic terms. AGI, he writes, is less like the internet than like fire or electricity. "We've essentially found a way to make sand think. It's miraculous." The harder question is the one his plan cannot answer. Can a body funded by the labs, and watching for deception in the models they profit from, ever be the one to say stop?

Exclusive: Google's Hassabis calls for U.S.-led global AI watchdog

Why it matters: In an exclusive interview with Axios, Hassabis said the time has come for a more "systematic" approach to AI regulation -- funded by the industry, staffed by world-class technical experts, and answerable to the U.S. government. Today's AI-driven cyber risks are "warning shots," Hassabis told us from his London base. Within 18 months, he said, those capabilities -- plus far graver biological and nuclear threats -- could live inside open-source models beyond any government's control. * Hassabis emphasized to us that risks will come from the major labs' more powerful future proprietary models, not just open-source models. * "What we collectively do now," he writes in his manifesto, "will determine how the next phase of civilization unfolds." Behind the scenes: Hassabis has spent months quietly building support for the plan, briefing the Trump administration, fellow lab leaders and European officials before going public. * "The noises I've been hearing are very positive," he said of his talks with the administration, which had embraced a laissez-faire approach to AI regulation prior to the Mythos scare. * Hassabis, a scientist who commands rare respect across AI's warring camps, says the other major lab leaders agree at a high level: "This is where the industry needs to go." * His timeline is aggressive. "Months," Hassabis said, ideally with the new body operational "before year-end." How it works: Hassabis is proposing an AI standards body modeled on FINRA (Financial Industry Regulatory Authority), the private, industry-funded watchdog that polices Wall Street under SEC oversight. * Frontier labs would initially share their models with the body voluntarily, up to 30 days before release, for safety testing that probes dangerous cyber, biological and "deception" capabilities. * Once the testing regime proves "effective and robust," Hassabis writes, formalization "could quickly follow." That means frontier models would be required to pass before they could be deployed in the U.S. market. * Hassabis envisions a majority-independent board stacked with Turing Award winners and other credentialed experts, alongside industry, government and open-source representatives. The intrigue: The rules would apply to all frontier-class models, "no matter their country of origin or whether they are open or closed" -- with the qualifying benchmarks regularly updated as capabilities evolve. * Hassabis predicts the "frontier" designation would carry cachet: being tested means you matter. "I think that's a pretty nice, prestige kind of asset to have," he told us. The big picture: The Trump administration's improvised crackdown on Anthropic's Mythos and Fable models last month was "a bit of a wake-up call," Hassabis said -- proof Washington needs something sturdier than ad hoc directives. * Anthropic saw its most powerful models frozen overnight by an export-control order, then spent 2½ weeks negotiating their release with no established rules, protocol or playbook. * OpenAI, hoping to avoid the same fate, agreed to restrict GPT-5.6 to government-vetted partners at launch. It was released publicly last week after negotiations and testing with the Commerce Department. Between the lines: Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei has issued his own call for binding regulation, envisioning an FAA-style agency with the power to block unsafe models. * The lab chiefs behind Gemini and Claude now agree Washington should regulate them, differing mainly on who holds the authority. The bottom line: Hassabis believes AGI -- a system with all the cognitive powers of the human brain -- is "probably only a few short years away," and that we're standing in "the foothills of the singularity." * "We've essentially found a way to make sand think," he writes. "It's miraculous."

Demis Hassabis calls for U.S.-led AI standards body like FINRA

Google $GOOGL DeepMind CEO Demis Hassabis called Tuesday for the U.S. to establish an AI standards body modeled on the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, the private, industry-funded watchdog that polices Wall Street under Securities and Exchange Commission oversight. Hassabis, a Nobel laureate, laid out the plan in an essay he published Tuesday on X $TWTR under the title "A Framework for Frontier AI and the Dawning of a New Age." He said "urgent action" was needed to address risks tied to artificial general intelligence, which he described as probably only a few short years away. "We've already seen the challenges frontier models pose for cybersecurity, and other threats including nuclear and bio risks may soon emerge as capabilities continue to advance," he wrote. The proposed body would be structured as a federally overseen public-private partnership with a board composed of independent technical experts, open-source representatives, and government officials, according to CNBC. Hassabis said industry would likely foot the bill, and that the organization would need considerable financial backing to hire top-tier technical staff and run the compute-intensive evaluations required for large-scale model testing. Initially, frontier labs would submit their models to the body ahead of release -- with a window of up to 30 days -- on a voluntary basis. After the regime demonstrated it was working, Hassabis envisions compliance becoming a prerequisite for any model to go live for American users. According to Axios, the framework would cover every frontier-class model -- domestic or foreign, proprietary or open-weight -- with eligibility thresholds updated as capabilities grow. Hassabis said he wants the body operational before year-end. Testing would probe for dangerous cyber, biological, and deception capabilities, Hassabis said. Specific checks could include looking for attempts to bypass safety guardrails and verifying that AI-generated images carry digital watermarks. Hassabis told Axios that the administration's handling of Anthropic's Mythos and Fable models last month -- which he called "a bit of a wake-up call" -- showed that Washington requires a formal governance structure rather than improvised, case-by-case responses. He said the conversations he has had with the administration have been positive. The call comes roughly a month after Hassabis and Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei jointly urged world leaders at a closed-door G7 session in Évian-les-Bains, France, to back a U.S.-led AI governance framework. That gathering included President Donald Trump and other G7 heads of state, along with executives from several major technology companies. No concrete commitments emerged from that meeting. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has separately called for a similar international standards body, according to CNBC. Hassabis said that other major lab leaders agree at a high level that the industry needs to move in this direction, though Anthropic's Dario Amodei has called for a distinct FAA-style agency with the power to block unsafe models outright.

Google DeepMind Founder Wants a Wall Street-Style Watchdog to Stop Dangerous AI

Google DeepMind co-founder Demis Hassabis wants a new U.S.-led watchdog to make that call. He said it could begin operating before the end of 2026, test the world's most advanced models before release, and eventually bar those judged unsafe from the American market. Hassabis co-founded DeepMind as a London startup in 2010. Google acquired it four years later. He now leads Google's flagship AI lab, meaning his proposed system would govern the same market in which Google competes with OpenAI, Anthropic, and other developers. In a manifesto posted Tuesday to Substack, Hassabis proposed a federally overseen, largely industry-funded body modeled on the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, or FINRA, Wall Street's self-regulator.

Google DeepMind's AI safety proposal raises questions over self-regulation

Sreeraman Thiagarajan Sreeraman Thiagarajan is director, JK India eAgriTech Earlier this week, Google DeepMind CEO Demis Hassabis posted a proposal, 'A Framework for Frontier AI and the Dawning of a New Age'. He wants the US to establish a standards body modelled on Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (Finra), the industry-funded organisation that polices US broker-dealers under Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Hassabis proposes frontier labs share their most advanced models with this body, voluntarily at first, up to 30 days before release, for testing against cyber, biological and deception risks. Once the testing regime proves itself, participation would stop being voluntary. No frontier model could launch for US users without passing the body's tests first. The intent deserves respect. Hassabis won the Chemistry Nobel with John M Jumper in 2024 for AI research contributions to protein structure prediction. His worry that competitive pressure is outrunning the field's understanding of its creations is legit and shared by many. The problem is the institution he has proposed to tackle this worry. The Finra analogy sounds reassuring as it borrows legitimacy of financial regulation without borrowing conditions that make financial regulation work. Self-regulation is a familiar creature in India, too. Internet and Mobile Association of India's (IAMAI) self-governance codes for digital media are by the industry, for the industry, and of the industry. They work only because a sovereign regulator stands above them with real teeth. Finra is the same animal. It's a class monitor, a student given a badge, and the arrangement holds because there is a warden, teacher and principal. Remove the principal and you don't have a lighter form of discipline. You have a student with a badge. Players controlling the referee? Hassabis' proposed AI body, in its opening phase, has no 'principal'. No statute sits above it. Its funding comes from the labs whose models it would judge, because, as Hassabis notes, world-class technical talent and large-scale testing compute are expensive. A referee paid by the players, ruling on the players, with no league above the referee. Slippery by design There's a second condition financial self-regulation quietly depends on: the object being regulated holds 'still'. A trade is a trade. A security is defined in statute. Finra can write rules because the thing it rules on does not reinvent itself every two quarters. Frontier AI fails this test by design, and it's not an asset like mutual fund. The proposal itself concedes it, promising that eligibility thresholds will be updated as capabilities grow. The regulated will define, twice a year, what counts as regulatable. In finance, this would be called 'letting the asset manager draft the definition of a security'. Confidentiality challenge A mutual fund files its strategy with Sebi because publishing it doesn't kill the fund. Its edge lies in execution. For a frontier model, the artefact is the edge. This proposal asks rivals to hand their crown jewels to a shared body, staffed at industry expense, with a board that includes industry representatives, 30 days before launch. Even with the best confidentiality architecture, that is a concentration of pre-release knowledge the industry has never attempted. Who'll watch the watchmen? Urgency in Hassabis' proposal rests on the claim that artificial general intelligence (AGI) - AI that matches or surpasses human capabilities - is probably a few years away, an event he compares to an Industrial Revolution arriving at 10x scale and speed. Perhaps. But AGI has no standard definition or an agreed-upon test, and has its goalpost moved every time a milestone has been crossed. Not to mention no agreement found yet on what 'general intelligence' is. Machines producing novel text and passing benchmarks tell us that capabilities are compounding. But it doesn't tell us of a singular threshold approaching on a knowable date. If the countdown is wrong, we will have constructed a permanent gatekeeper for a temporary panic. The demonstrable risks Hassabis names are real and need no AGI premise to justify testing. The honest sequence runs in the opposite direction to his: statute first, scope narrowed to harms we can define and measure, funding insulated from the funded first. Only then an industry body to execute under supervision. The question Hassabis never answers is the oldest one in regulation: who will watch the watchmen? Until someone answers it in statute rather than in goodwill, a Finra-like body for AI is not a safety framework. It's the industry marking its own homework, 30 days before the exam.

AI regulation: US could set up "Standards Body" to regulate frontier AI models: Google DeepMind CEO

According to Demis Hassabis, Co-Founder & CEO, Google DeepMind, the US is well positioned to take the first step in developing such a framework given its economic and technical standing. The United States could establish a new Standards Body modelled on a federally overseen public-private partnership or self-regulatory organisation with a board that includes independent leading technical experts and open-source representatives. According to Demis Hassabis, Co-Founder & CEO, Google DeepMind, the US is well positioned to take the first step in developing such a framework given its economic and technical standing. "The rapid progress we're seeing in AI requires a new approach to testing frontier AI model capabilities...The US is well positioned, given its economic and technical standing, to take the first step in developing such a framework. It could establish a new Standards Body modelled on a federally overseen public-private partnership or self-regulatory organisation...," Hassabis said on X. The proposal aims to create a dynamic, adaptable, and rigorous framework to test frontier AI model capabilities amid rapid technological progress. Hassabis mentioned that the proposed entity, similar to the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), would require substantial funding coming mostly from the industry to attract world-class technical talent and provide necessary compute resources for large-scale testing. The Standards Body would develop assessment protocols and collaborate with federal agencies and the US National Labs to conduct testing in areas relevant to national security. A model would qualify as "Frontier-class" by meeting specific benchmarks determined by the body, which would be regularly updated to match evolving capabilities. Hassabis explained that organisations with these models would be deemed "Frontier Labs" and encouraged to adopt best practices, including publishing model cards, maintaining strong internal cybersecurity, vetting personnel, and resourcing safety research. Initially, Frontier Labs would voluntarily share models with the Standards Body for review up to 30 days before release. Once the assessment protocol proves effective and robust, formalisation could follow, requiring Frontier Models to pass the review to be deployed in the US market. Labs would also work with the body to address critical post-release vulnerabilities. "The strength of this approach is it would be technically focused, while at the same time supporting innovation and incentivising responsible behaviour," Hassabis said. "It is designed to keep up with the field's acceleration and adapt to the biggest risks as they are identified, and could be ratcheted up if the seriousness of the situation demands, including coordinating a slowdown in development among the Frontier Labs if deemed necessary," he added. Model assessments would include rigorous scientific evaluations of capabilities in cybersecurity, biological threats, and high-risk domains. Specific agentic AI tests would look for attempts to bypass safety guardrails or signs of deception, ensuring practices like digital watermarking and generating human-readable output tokens. Hassabis noted that the evaluations would be updated quarterly at the start, with outdated benchmarks deprecated. The body would eventually build technical capacity to create independent held-out tests to prevent overfitting, promoting an ecosystem of third-party auditors with the US government. "AGI has the potential to be the ultimate tool for advancing science and medicine, and to drive enormous productivity gains and economic growth," Hassabis stated. "But in order to achieve this, we need to get the technical foundations right by coordinating around a shared global framework, using the most rigorous scientific methods, and bringing the best minds together to work on the challenges we face," he noted. The framework would apply to Frontier-class models regardless of their country of origin or open-source status, while non-frontier models from startups or academia would remain exempt. The initiative seeks to provide a starting point for international standards to manage serious risks while ensuring global access to AI benefits. (ANI)

Google DeepMind Chief Calls for US-Led Body to Test Frontier AI Models | PYMNTS.com

The proposal would cover frontier models developed in the U.S. and abroad, including open and closed systems, the Financial Times reported Tuesday (July 14). The body would test dangerous capabilities, cybersecurity risks and whether model safeguards can be bypassed. Artificial general intelligence capable of matching the human brain across a broad range of tasks is "probably only a few short years away," leaving society a "precious window" to establish oversight, Hassabis said, per the report. Hassabis proposed modeling the organization on the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), the self-regulatory organization overseeing U.S. securities firms, the report said. Hassabis said a U.S.-initiated system could become the foundation for international standards as governments confront risks from increasingly capable systems, according to the report. The framework could give AI companies a common testing process while avoiding a separate licensing regime for every model. Independent testers could compare models against common thresholds and update tests as new capabilities emerge. The White House has already moved toward pre-release oversight. A June executive order sought voluntary access to covered frontier models for up to 30 days before release to test advanced cyber capabilities. Google DeepMind, Microsoft and xAI previously agreed to provide models for federal national security testing. The debate intensified after the U.S. restricted access to Anthropic's Mythos models over concerns that safety controls could be bypassed. Anthropic complied while arguing that the identified jailbreak did not justify a broad recall. Congress is considering additional requirements. A House bill introduced in June would require frontier developers to report dangerous capabilities, breaches and safety incidents within seven days of discovery. Hassabis' proposal reflects a shift from debating whether frontier AI needs oversight to deciding who conducts the tests, which models qualify and whether regulators can delay deployment. For all PYMNTS AI coverage, subscribe to the daily AI Newsletter.

Demis Hassabis' AI Regulatory Body Proposal Has a MAGA Flavour

Google DeepMind CEO feels the need for a Standards body Standards Body for developing assessment protocols and working with appropriate federal agencies and the US National Labs to conduct testing in areas relevant to national security Google DeepMind CEO Demis Hassabis has suggested a new regulatory body, funded by the industry, to oversee frontier model releases, with several AI leaders including Sam Altman and Satya Nadella supporting it. However, it comes just at the time when the Trump administration has announced the "Golden Eagle" program around AI cybersecurity. In a detailed post via his X handle, Hassabis says "Initially, Frontier Labs would voluntarily share models with the Standards Body for review up to 30 days before release. "Once the assessment protocol is shown to be effective and robust, formalisation could quickly follow, meaning that Frontier Models would be required to pass it to be deployed in the US market." Quite clearly the move is aimed to regulate the US market as Hassabis' comments above indicate while he goes on ratify it by stating later in the post that AI Labs "would also work with the Standards Body to address any critical post-release vulnerabilities." To us, this seems like a classic case of the US industry wanting to placate President Trump. The White House announced the launch of the first program to come out of its early June executive order on AI cybersecurity. The Gold Eagle program will function as a clearinghouse composed of government agencies and companies that allows them to coordinate on cyber vulnerabilities and responses. While we aren't suggesting anything underhand here, the fact that Hassabis' statement came on the same day as White House announcing the Gold Eagle is suggestive. Maybe, that's what the tech industry in the US wants after all - a place at the table that decides regulations around the AI industry. From Hassabis' point of view, the creation of this group would ensure less of government intervention of the kind we saw when the Trump regime ordered Anthropic to pull back its Claude Mythos 5 from the export market and followed suit when OpenAI had announced the launch of its similarly powerful model GPT-5.6. Both have since been cleared for a rollout. The DeepMind co-founder's perspective found favour with several tech leaders with Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella posting on X: "An important piece from Demis. We need more of this kind of thinking. A good reminder that the goal is a frontier ecosystem that promotes innovation and choice, while avoiding any one model drop that breaks the world!" The idea was also endorsed by investor Chamath Palihapatiya who noted on X: "As usual, Demis is quite well reasoned and his framework is very reasonable. Especially considering that the alternative seems to be the "Pull Up The Ladder Framework" from the other guys, I would suggest we adopt Demis' version." Others who responded in single words to Hassabis' post include OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, Block co-founder Jack Dorsey and investor Ashton Kutcher. Of course, at first glance there is merit in what Hassabis says in terms of a group of experts reviewing frontier AI models to ensure they don't pose dangers to cybersecurity, biological threats. "Artificial General Intelligence cannot be compared to standard technological breakthroughs, not even ones as consequential as the internet or mobile - it is much more akin to the discovery of electricity or fire. If you stop to think about it, we've essentially found a way to make sand think. It's miraculous," Hassabis says in his post. That being said, his recommendations do nothing to question the basis of the frenetic activity that the AI industry is indulging in at the moment, possibly creating a bubble that could break and wipe away all of the gains that the Google DeepMind boss describes above. Maybe, he does not care how young pretenders like Anthropic and OpenAI are racing ahead. Or maybe it is just another of those long and eloquent commentaries that the AI industry has long shared, mostly calling for action to prevent destroying humanity, preparing for job losses and other such cataclysmic outcomes. Barely a day back, we had Nobel Laureates signing an open letter seeking immediate action to build incentives, guardrails and such around AI. Harking back a couple of years, didn't several AI labs led by the likes of Anthropic and OpenAI come out with a similar demand for setting up a regulatory body? At that point, Anthropic had a new governance structure called Long-Term Benefit Trust that it claimed would fine-tune corporate governance at the company. Taking moral high ground is one thing, but sticking with it is another. Just a single blow in the form of the Pentagon thrown them out from federal business in March brought about a shift as reports of Anthropic helping the US government surfaced time and again, with one claiming that security agencies were using Claude Mythos even when it was under review. Without doubt that's a rabbit hole that none in the industry would prefer going down. In which case how does one see Hassabis' proposal? At best, as a well-timed one with questionable intentions, given that the Trump administration appears to be doing its own regulatory exercise that could hamper AI exports under the garb of MAGA. "The strength of this approach is it would be technically focused, while at the same time supporting innovation and incentivising responsible behaviour," Hassabis says. "It is designed to keep up with the field's acceleration and adapt to the biggest risks as they are identified, and could be ratcheted up if the seriousness of the situation demands." Which basically tells us that the US tech industry wants representation on the body that President Trump is building right now to regulate AI in ways that only he and his cohort can understand. Of course, those close to Trump say he believes in unregulated AI. Sriram Krishnan, a former White House AI advisor and a16z general partner, also responded to Hassabis' post with a cryptic "This is a very thoughtful proposal" comment. The official had recently discounted the possibility of the US government having an AI regulator claiming that Trump will oppose it. "There will not be an FDA for AI," he had told FT.com. A careful review of Hassabis' comments suggest that his proposal would be "built on" the ad hoc reviews done by the White House recently, an action that evoked significant criticism for lack of technical expertise and for being opaque with decision-making on when frontier models can be released and to which countries, if you may add. Remember, Trump had told Anthropic to do a limited release of Mythos 5 only to "friendly partners" and we had questioned whether Pakistan would be one at the current juncture! All that Hassabis wants is the inclusion of industry representatives into the regulatory system that will be all US. So, for all the hype around the idea and the support it has garnered from a few US tech czars, this move does nothing but pushes President Trump's agenda of developing a hegemony around AI that benefits the US and maybe the rest of the world later.

Google DeepMind CEO Demis Hassabis Calls for Urgent AGI Safety Rules

Google DeepMind CEO Demis Hassabis says the world has only a small window to prepare for AGI and believes strong AI safety rules should come before more powerful systems are built. Google DeepMind CEO Demis Hassabis has asked world leaders to move quickly on AI safety. He believes Artificial General Intelligence, or AGI, may become real within the next few years. So, he has mentioned that countries should not wait to create rules for powerful AI systems. In a recent essay, Hassabis said the world still has time to prepare, but the window is limited. He called for an international group that can test advanced AI models before they are released. According to him, AI has the power to change the world in many positive ways, but it also needs clear limits to mitigate potential risks.

Google DeepMind CEO calls for new AI regulator, Sam Altman and Sundar Pichai react

Hassabis's post has caught the attention of OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and Google CEO Sundar Pichai. Google DeepMind CEO Demis Hassabis has called for a new regulatory body to oversee the release of powerful AI models. In a post on X titled "A Framework for Frontier AI and the Dawning of a New Age," Hassabis proposed the creation of a standards body that could test advanced AI models before they are released. He said the organisation could be modelled on the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA). The post has also caught the attention of key technology leaders, including OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and Google CEO Sundar Pichai. What Google DeepMind CEO Demis Hassabis said Hassabis wants the proposed standards body to review frontier AI models before they are made available to users. Frontier models refer to the most advanced and powerful AI systems being developed by leading AI companies. Under his proposal, AI labs would initially share their models with the standards body voluntarily. The models could be submitted for review up to 30 days before launch. "Initially, Frontier Labs would voluntarily share models with the Standards Body for review up to 30 days before release," Hassabis wrote in his post. "Once the assessment protocol is shown to be effective and robust, formalisation could quickly follow, meaning that Frontier Models would be required to pass it to be deployed in the US market. Labs would also work with the Standards Body to address any critical post-release vulnerabilities." Also read: OpenAI's first AI device may be a screenless ChatGPT speaker with a camera: What to expect He said model assessments should include detailed tests to check AI capabilities in high-risk areas such as cybersecurity and biological threats. Agentic AI systems should also be tested to see if they try to bypass safety measures or show signs of deceptive behaviour. Hassabis also called for best practices such as adding digital watermarks to AI-generated images and using human-readable output tokens to better understand AI model reasoning. Also read: Sam Altman pokes fun at Anthropic's Claude commercial, says he thought it was satire Sam Altman and Sundar Pichai react Hassabis' post received positive reactions from two major technology leaders. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman shared his support for the idea on X. "This is a thoughtful proposal from demis," Altman posted. Google CEO Sundar Pichai also reacted to the proposal. "Well said Demis! Worth reading," Pichai wrote.