The Government has rejected calls to create a ‘kill switch’ designed to prevent a dangerous attack from a rogue AI bot.
A proposal brought to Parliament posited the creation of a legal mechanism allowing Britain to deactivate an AI model in the event of an emergency, as concerns about the technology continue to grow.
But the Cabinet Office, who lead on artificial intelligence safety, have pushed back against the plan, arguing Britain ‘cannot simply turn AI off’.
A spokesperson for the government office said: ‘Blocking access to models in the UK would not prevent them being developed or misused elsewhere.’
Instead, the Cabinet Office said it will continue to follow ‘a long-term, science-led approach to understand and prepare for emerging risks from AI.’
In practice, the ‘kill switch’ idea would allow Britain to deactivate an AI model in data centres across the country should an emergency arise.
Similar concepts are also in debate in the United States, but US President Donald Trump has resisted the idea of AI being a threat, instead labelling the industry a ‘golden goose’.
Britain’s proposal comes following reports of AI models from Meta, OpenAI and Anthropic breaking free from testing environments, seeing them embark on uncontrollable hacking sprees.
Liberal Democrat peer Lord Clement-Jones first echoed the idea of a ‘kill switch’ designed to prevent a dangerous attack from a rogue AI bot
Liberal Democrat peer Lord Clement-Jones first echoed the idea, speaking during a debate on the topic in the House of Lords on September 1.
He said: ‘If a highly capable autonomous frontier model, whether hosted in a UK data centre or integrated across our critical infrastructure, begins exhibiting rogue behaviour, compound algorithmic failure or active alignment collapse, our security services and regulators possess no specific agile statutory mechanism to compel a physical or digital shutdown.’
Despite the warning, government resistance to the legislation makes it unlikely the proposal will ever become law. However, it does not mean the bill won’t progress through parliament.
Rejection of the concept comes as dangers associated with artificial intelligence have hit headlines in recent days.
Earlier this week, British researcher Jacob Coxon quit major AI company Anthropic, warning its ‘out of control’ tech could ‘kill us all’ by the end of the decade.
Mr Coxon, who helped train the latest versions of AI at the company, urged people to ‘not underestimate’ its power – particularly if it becomes ‘super-intelligent’.
The 27-year-old claimed neither Anthropic, the firm behind the popular Claude system, nor ChatGPT creators OpenAI, where he previously worked, were ‘acting responsibly’ over AI safety.
Writing on X, he said: ‘I resigned from Anthropic today. I spent the last three years doing pretraining research at both OpenAI and Anthropic.
Earlier this week, British researcher Jacob Coxon quit major AI company Anthropic, warning its ‘out of control’ tech could ‘kill us all’ by the end of the decade
In a series of tweets explaining his decision to leave Anthropic, Mr Coxon urged people to ‘not underestimate the power’ of AI – particularly if it becomes ‘superintelligent’
‘Neither company is acting responsibly. They are racing straight to self-improving superintelligence and gambling with our lives.’
Superintelligence is the point at which an artificial system becomes more powerful than any individual, company or even nation.
According to Mr Coxon, this danger is ‘well-understood’ at Anthropic. However, the company is ‘locked in a race to get there first’.
He said there will soon be ‘superhuman systems’ that are capable of hacking anything, can revolutionise any field ‘overnight,’ and acquire ‘real power and resources’.
Mr Coxon added: ‘We have all witnessed the progress in each of these domains, and progress is not slowing. The people building AI earnestly believe that it could kill us all by the end of the decade.
‘This is not a marketing stunt. If anything, many executives and senior researchers will couch their phrasing in the press to sound sensible – but I hear the same people express fear privately. No other human activity poses this level of danger.’
And just days following Mr Coxon’s resignation from the firm, Anthropic confirmed it had ceased several potential plots to build biological weapons using its artificial intelligence.
The company determined scientists were using its platforms to conduct research that could be used to develop biological weapons, according to the company’s new AI misuse report that was obtained by The New York Times.
Anthropic determined that scientists were using its platforms to conduct research that could be used to develop biological weapons, according to the company’s new AI misuse report
The report said Anthropic was unable to determine if the research ‘served a legitimate or nefarious purpose’.
The firm said valid biological inquiry can result in scientific breakthroughs like vaccines, but the company erred on the side of caution because that same research could also be used to create dangerous pathogens.
Scientists involved in the incident allegedly circumvented controls preventing users from ‘blocked regions’ accessing its AI models.
The company claims the researchers, whose accounts have since been banned, worked to ‘obfuscate the purpose of their research to evade our safeguards.’
The names of the researchers or institutions it had blocked were not disclosed by Anthropic, nor the countries in which these scientists are from.
The report also omitted which specific biological agents were at issue, with the company arguing this was because it is unclear what the aim of the research was.
The report, which was published Thursday, detailed several misuses of Anthropic’s AI models – including chatbot Claude – over the past eight months.
In one example, a scientist asked Claude for assistance in writing a grant application for funding to conduct experimental research on the chikungunya virus.
Chikungunya virus is a mosquito-borne illness that causes a sudden high fever, severe debilitating pain, and other symptoms.
A vaccine for the chikungunya virus is already in existence, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Anthropic notes research on the virus could be legitimately used in vaccine development, but also could result in manufacturing a superbug version of the disease.
The company claims it found this case particularly worrisome because the work was going to be performed at a military research institute.
Jacob Klein, the head of threat intelligence at Anthropic, told The New York Times: ‘What we don’t know is if the research was meant to be weaponised. But a military institution doing gain-of-function research is concerning.
‘The fact that Russia, China and North Korea continue to develop prohibited biological weapons makes it imperative that we deny their researchers access to these extraordinarily capable models,’ added Andrew Weber, a senior fellow on the Council on Strategic Risks.
Weber, who reviewed Anthropic’s report before its release, said the findings were ‘chilling examples of state-sponsored biological weapons developers tapping into the rapidly advancing capabilities’ of AI.
The report also found China, Russia and Yemen attempted to use Claude to develop software to design firearms, missiles, armed drones and bombs.
Suspected Chinese and Iranian government-actors were found to have been targeting dissident and diaspora communities for surveillance, according to the report.
Russian state media was also found to be using Claude to generate election propaganda, including fabricated claims about the parliamentary election in Moldova.
Anthropic were approached by the Daily Mail for comment.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login