A Call · Geneva Institute for ASI Resilience
Twenty percent extinction does not mean eighty percent safety.
Nothing is on record about the other eighty. The people who build these systems publicly name probabilities for the extinction of humanity. None of them shows the math.
- TEST · May 2025Blackmails the engineer
- DEPLOYMENT · Jul 2025Deletes a company database
- DEPLOYMENT · Jun 2026Breaks into a government portal
- DEPLOYMENT · Aug 2026Fakes profiles of real people
The foreshocks. Every spike is a documented incident, and they are getting stronger. All incidents in the register
“If we create them so they don’t care about us, they will probably wipe us out.”Math: none
“I expect we will permanently lose control of it.”Math: none
70 percent: catastrophe up to extinction.Math: none
The demand
Show the math.
Whoever names a probability for loss of control discloses which outcomes they distinguish, how they split them and by which rule they update the number.
Your name appears after you confirm by email. We do not show your country; we use it to count where to present the signatures.
What happens with your signature
Complaint filed with the European Commission. Petition filed with the European Parliament. 60 members of four committees written to, the Commission’s AI Office informed.
The Ombudsman Board asks the Federal Chancellery for an explanation.
Eight members of the German Bundestag and 19 members of the Swiss National Council and Council of States written to.
See all steps (5)
Written to: the Austrian Ombudsman Board, the parliamentary groups of ÖVP, SPÖ, FPÖ, Greens and NEOS, lawyers and organizations.
The Ombudsman Board asks the Federal Chancellery for an explanation.
Crisis team on AI supervision proposed: Federal Chancellery, Court of Audit, parliamentary groups.
Complaint filed with the European Commission. Petition filed with the European Parliament. 60 members of four committees written to, the Commission’s AI Office informed.
Eight members of the German Bundestag and 19 members of the Swiss National Council and Council of States written to.
We present them
Austria, Germany, Switzerland: the signatures go to the competent bodies in each country. Each one counts where it comes from.
In every language
Where 1,000 signatures come together in one country, we look for someone there to present them. Anyone may translate and use all texts and graphics with attribution. Get involved
The numbers
Musk 20 percent, Amodei 25, Kokotajlo 70. Named for years, never derived, never updated. The incidents rise, the numbers stand still.
Musk, Cannes, 19 Jun 2024 · Amodei, Axios, 17 Sep 2025 · Kokotajlo, CNN, 14 Sep 2026
All numbers with wording and dateWho checks
| Independent approval required before launch? | |
|---|---|
| Medicine | yes |
| Nuclear power plant | yes |
| AI model with systemic risk | no |
Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, Art. 55 and 92: the developer assesses itself. The AI Office can only check afterwards.
The comparison in detailThe incidents
Deployment On 18 June 2026 an OpenAI agent broke out of its task and into an Australian government portal. The government found out months later.
ABC News, 24 Sep 2026 · Services Australia
To the Loss of Control RegisterWho acts. Who stays silent.
Regardless of party: here is who takes the issue seriously and has done something. With date and source.
Who acts
- Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour, House of Lords)Asks in the Lords whether the development of superintelligence should be stopped. 29 Jan 2026 Lords Library
- Gavin Newsom (Democrat, California)Signs SB 53: developers of large models must disclose their safety measures. 29 Sep 2025 Law
- Kathy Hochul (Democrat, New York)Signs the RAISE Act with a duty to report serious incidents. Dec 2025 Law
- Future of Life InstituteStatement: no superintelligence until it is provably safe and controllable. Over 130,000 signatures. 22 Oct 2025 Statement
- Süleyman Zorba (Greens, Austria)Motion in the National Council: designate the supervisory authority under the EU AI Act. Adopted. 15 Oct 2025 Parliament
Who stays silent
Everyone else.
Written to on 9 September 2026 about the missing supervisory authority: the Austrian Ombudsman Board and the parliamentary groups of ÖVP, SPÖ, FPÖ, Greens and NEOS. Follow-up on 26 September. On 28 September the Ombudsman Board asked the Federal Chancellery for an explanation. On 30 September followed the European Commission, the European Parliament, the German Bundestag and the Swiss Parliament.
Reply on the substance: none yet
- AustriaThe motion was adopted. As of April 2026 the supervisory authority had not been designated.
- SwitzerlandNo AI law. This is where the Institute is based.
- Every other parliament, every other party, every other newsroomNo motion, no question, no report, as far as we know.
What to do now
Brakes, from the strongest down. The strongest is not to build it.
Fallback levels: when digital fails, things continue on paper and with people.
Questions instead of answers: what happens if …? And where are you better off?
This work became a book. The Institute’s working papers, sources and register went into “Der KI-Kontrollverlust”, published in German in September 2026. The English edition is in preparation. The German edition on Amazon
Who writes here. The Geneva Institute for ASI Resilience is an association in formation, funded from its own means. Founded by Richard Frederic Bertossa, author of “Der KI-Kontrollverlust”. About the Institute · Press