Mark Zuckerberg attacks rivals over AI governance, pushes for broader access to superintelligence

Mark Zuckerberg Blasts Centralization of A.I. Power

In an interview, Meta's chief executive took aim at Anthropic and OpenAI, which have pushed to tightly control A.I. development, and said he supported "more openness." Mark Zuckerberg came out swinging against Anthropic and OpenAI, two of the world's most valuable artificial intelligence start-ups, saying the way they developed A.I. software could lead to a centralization of power that would narrow people's access to the transformational technology. In an interview on Tuesday, the 42-year-old chief executive of Meta did not call out Anthropic and OpenAI by name. But he said leading research labs that want to develop A.I. technology in a tightly controlled manner -- as Anthropic and OpenAI have done -- would be akin to "abandoning our values" in American tech development and would stifle innovation. "So much of the discourse from a lot of the other labs that are developing this is overwhelmingly filled with doom," Mr. Zuckerberg said. "There needs to be a voice or several voices that are bringing realism to this debate." The comments from Mr. Zuckerberg, who rarely gives interviews to traditional news organizations, escalate a fraught debate over how artificial intelligence software should be created that has divided Silicon Valley. Technologists like Dario Amodei, the chief executive of Anthropic, and Sam Altman, the chief executive of OpenAI, have said some of today's leading A.I. models are too dangerous to be shared and developed without tight controls. But Microsoft, Nvidia, Google and Meta have disagreed, contending that many A.I. models must be developed largely in the open for people to advance the technology and build new businesses. The discord heightened this month as breakthroughs in Chinese A.I. models appeared to erode the head start that American companies like Anthropic and OpenAI have enjoyed. The companies have lobbied regulators in Washington, raising concerns about Chinese open-source A.I. models. On Friday, Jensen Huang, the chief executive of Nvidia, posted a letter supporting open-source software development, which others in Silicon Valley rallied around. This week, Mr. Huang announced a coalition to work on open-source safety and cybersecurity tools for A.I., joined by other tech giants like SpaceX and IBM. Tech executives including Mr. Huang and Mr. Altman are traveling to Washington this week to further make their case to the Trump administration, which is mulling how to deal with the issue. Amid the battle, Mr. Zuckerberg has repeatedly argued that more people should have access to A.I. technology rather than less, a tacit criticism of Mr. Amodei and Mr. Altman. Mr. Amodei, in particular, has called out the dangers of "alignment risk," an issue with programming artificial intelligence in a way that is safe toward humans. "I think a lot of people have this notion that if you build some kind of singular A.I. you can, through some idealized form of alignment, make sure it is benevolent to humanity," Mr. Zuckerberg said in the interview. "I'm personally skeptical of that path." He instead called for "personalized superintelligence" for everyone, which would mean configuring A.I. bots to suit people's needs and desires. A central "benevolent" A.I. superpower, he argued, would be untenable because people have different views and value systems. "I think it is literally impossible to have a single benevolent superintelligence that is simultaneously aligned with everyone at once," Mr. Zuckerberg said. Representatives from Anthropic and OpenAI did not immediately respond to requests for comment. In previous statements, OpenAI has said it supports open-source software and is working with the White House on safe ways to support A.I. development. In a blog post on Monday, Mr. Amodei said Anthropic was focused on "keeping powerful chips out of authoritarian hands, stopping industrial-scale distillation, and requiring safety testing of all sufficiently capable models, open and closed." (The New York Times has sued OpenAI and Microsoft, claiming copyright infringement of news articles. The two companies have denied the claims.) Meta's own philosophy around A.I. development has fluctuated. For years, the company championed open-source A.I. and gave away its A.I. models for free. Last spring, after falling behind Anthropic and OpenAI in the A.I. race, Mr. Zuckerberg took action. He invested $14.3 billion in ScaleAI, an A.I. start-up, and hired its founder, Alexandr Wang, to revamp Meta's A.I. division, which was renamed Meta Superintelligence Labs. Meta spent billions to assemble a team of all-star A.I. researchers around Mr. Wang and they began developing an A.I. model that was not open, but closed. The move gave Meta the potential to sell access to new models for more revenue. This month, it began selling access to its latest A.I. model, Muse Spark, for the first time. Meta also continues to develop open-source models. Mr. Zuckerberg has long believed that A.I. will transform society in positive ways that are yet to be understood. This month, Meta released a national advertising campaign saying that investing in A.I. tools and releasing them broadly meant the company was "betting on people." The Wall Street Journal published an opinion piece by Mr. Zuckerberg this week in which he criticized "centralizing" of A.I. power and said he believed in "individual empowerment, invention and balance of power." In the article, he did not name Anthropic and OpenAI. In Tuesday's interview, Mr. Zuckerberg acknowledged the A.I. debate was contentious and noted that talks with different parties in Silicon Valley and Washington had been productive. "I don't know if the goal is to have everyone agree on everything," he said. "Almost by definition, if you believe what I do, you don't need to convince everyone of everything." Looking back over the course of technology, he said, democratization of tech tools has tended to eventually win out. "I believe the general arc of the industry has been toward more openness and putting the power of tech into more people's hands, not fewer," he said.

Mark Zuckerberg wants AI superintelligence in everyone's hands

Meta says it can bring advanced AI to billions of people, though access won't give users control over the infrastructure, safeguards, or limits behind it In an opinion essay for The Wall Street Journal, Mark Zuckerberg lays out a modest ambition for Meta's AI. He wants to put superintelligence in everyone's hands, giving ordinary people technology powerful enough to improve their health or help them work. Zuckerberg presents personal superintelligence as an alternative to advanced AI being controlled by a few institutions. Meta can certainly distribute it on a scale few companies could match. What users would receive is an assistant built and governed somewhere else, with its most important decisions made for them. How Meta can reach billions Meta's apps averaged 3.56 billion daily active users in March 2026. More than 1 billion people already use Meta AI each month. That reach makes Zuckerberg's distribution plan unusually plausible. Meta wouldn't need to sell another gadget or persuade people to join an unfamiliar service. It could quietly place increasingly capable AI inside apps billions already open, allowing superintelligence to arrive as another update waiting beside the usual collection of new buttons. Who still controls the superintelligence Wide availability won't change who builds the technology. Stanford's 2026 AI Index found that industry produced more than 90% of notable frontier models in 2025. Developing them requires computing power and money concentrated among a small number of companies. Recommended Videos Meta expects to spend between $125 billion and $145 billion on infrastructure in 2026 alone. Users won't decide how the models are built or which safeguards they follow. Those choices remain with the company paying for the data centers. Personal superintelligence could give far more people powerful AI tools. Meta would still decide which ones reach them and where their limits sit. Do Americans actually want it Availability assumes an appetite that isn't guaranteed. A June 2026 Pew survey found that 63% of Americans believe AI is advancing too quickly. Only 8% have high confidence that American companies will develop it responsibly. Meta already has enough reach to put advanced AI in front of billions. The next detail to watch is whether users gain meaningful control over its safeguards and limits, or merely another Meta feature they never asked for.

Mark Zuckerberg takes aim at rivals, says AI should not be tightly controlled

While he did not directly name OpenAI or Anthropic, his remarks were widely seen as a response to their focus on AI safety and tighter controls. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has criticised the approach taken by some of the biggest AI companies and said advanced AI should not be controlled by a small group of organisations. In an interview with The New York Times, Zuckerberg argued that tightly controlled AI development would slow innovation and go against the values that have shaped the American technology industry. While he did not directly name OpenAI or Anthropic, his remarks were widely seen as a response to their focus on AI safety and tighter controls. Zuckerberg said AI should be available to more people instead of being kept in the hands of a few companies or institutions. His comments come as the debate over the future of AI continues to divide the tech industry. Some companies believe powerful AI systems should be developed carefully with strict safeguards. Others argue that wider access to AI will lead to faster progress and more innovation. Also read: Over 1,100 OpenAI, Google, Anthropic and other AI employees call for AI slowdown, cite real risk "So much of the discourse from a lot of the other labs that are developing this is overwhelmingly filled with doom," Zuckerberg said in the interview, as reported by ANI. "There needs to be a voice or several voices that are bringing realism to this debate." Zuckerberg also questioned the idea that a single, highly controlled AI system could safely serve everyone. He said people have different beliefs and needs, so one AI model should not decide what is best for everyone. "I think a lot of people have this notion that if you build some kind of singular AI you can, through some idealised form of alignment, make sure it is benevolent to humanity," Zuckerberg said. "I'm personally skeptical of that path." Also read: OpenAI's rogue AI agent attacked another tech company before Hugging Face hack: Report The interview comes shortly after Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei published a blog post explaining the company's focus on AI safety. He said Anthropic wants to prevent powerful AI chips from reaching authoritarian governments, stop industrial-scale AI distillation, and require safety testing for highly capable AI models. "I don't know if the goal is to have everyone agree on everything," he said. "Almost by definition, if you believe what I do, you don't need to convince everyone of everything." He added, "I believe the general arc of the industry has been toward more openness and putting the power of tech into more people's hands, not fewer."