Free journalism and analysis on nuclear risk, climate change and disruptive technologies including artificial intelligence, from the group behind the Doomsday Clock.
Why I recommend it: Good grounding if you want to argue about AI risk with facts rather than vibes.
Read / subscribe freeA nonprofit and bimonthly nontechnical journal on science and global security risks from advancing technology.
It publishes on a free-access website as well as in the journal, and keeps the symbolic Doomsday Clock.
1945
Founded by former Manhattan Project scientists in Chicago, right after the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Every January
Announces the Doomsday Clock setting.
Our own read, not the publication's.
Background from Wikipedia, checked October 5, 2026.
Sara Goudarzi in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (Sept. 30, 2026) argues there is no clear path from today's AI systems to superintelligence, and no basis for calculating the probability of doom — and that doom narratives serve large AI companies.
A September 2024 article by Kevin Klyman and Raphael Piliero in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists examining the comparison between artificial intelligence and nuclear weapons. The authors argue the analogy offers some lessons for risk mitigation but that the differences are more significant: AI development is diffuse across tens of firms and countries, making it far harder to contain than nuclear technology. Free to read.
Why I recommend it: The nuclear analogy drives a lot of AI policy proposals, from IAEA-style agencies to licensing regimes. This piece is the clearest short explanation of where that analogy helps and where it breaks.
Other resources that share this publication's topics.
Original Digital News Report 2026 chapter by Amy Ross Arguedas analyzing who uses AI chatbots for news, what they ask for and whether they follow links to publishers. Survey-based research; the chapter does not claim that chatbot use causes changes in news trust or traffic.
A KDnuggets guide by Vinod Chugani that goes round by round through current data science hiring processes, including AI-assisted coding rounds and generative AI evaluation questions, and lists ways candidates can prepare.
A Built In survey of job seekers on how AI tools shape which employers they find and consider. Among respondents who use AI for employer research, 66% say they applied to a company they had not considered and 53% say they decided not to apply somewhere because of what AI showed them. Built In sells employer branding services.
Artificial Analysis reports Muse Ember benchmark scores and task-cost estimates, including an Intelligence Index score of 36 and $0.14 per task in its evaluation. These are evaluator-specific results, not a verified Meta launch announcement or evidence of free model access.
Epoch AI explains an Inference Performance Index for estimating chip capacity across agentic workloads and output-speed requirements. Its modeled comparisons, expressed in GB300 equivalents, depend on workload and hardware assumptions and are not universal real-world performance guarantees.
OpenAI announces that organizations can purchase ChatGPT Enterprise through AWS Marketplace using existing procurement and billing arrangements. The announcement is freely readable; ChatGPT Enterprise is a paid service, not a free tool.
