Latest Posts

September Newsletter: 2017 Society for Risk Analysis Meeting
Posted on September 07, 2017

Dear friends,

Each year, GCRI hosts sessions on global catastrophic risk at the annual meeting of the Society for Risk Analysis, which is the leading academic and professional society for all things risk. This year, we have gotten three full sessions accepted for the meeting, our most ever. SRA is competitive and we are honored to have three sessions.

Likewise, for those of you who are interested in SRA but haven’t come to the meeting before, this would be a good year to come. SRA has a …

July Newsletter: Summer Talks and Presentations
Posted on July 07, 2017

Integrated Assessment

GCRI Executive Director Seth Baum gave a talk on “Integrated Assessment of Global Catastrophic Risk and Artificial Intelligence” at the Cambridge University Centre for the Study of Existential Risk (CSER) on June 28. Dr. Baum will also participate in a Tech2025 workshop on future AI risk on July 11 in New York City.

GCRI Director of Research Tony Barrett gave a talk on integrated assessment, nuclear war, AI, and risk reduction opportunities at an Effective Altruism DC event on global catastrophic risks on June 17.

Artificial Intelligence

GCRI Associate …

June Newsletter: Nuclear Weapons Ban Treaty
Posted on June 15, 2017

Dear friends,

This past May, a draft treaty to ban nuclear weapons was released at the United Nations. Nuclear weapons are a major global catastrophic risk, one that GCRI has done extensive work on. At first glance, the nuclear ban treaty would seem like something to wholeheartedly support. However, upon closer inspection, its merits are ambiguous.

The treaty is not expected to eliminate nuclear weapons because the nuclear-armed countries won’t sign it. Instead, it seeks to strengthen the norm against nuclear weapons and increase pressure for disarmament. …

May Newsletter: The Value of GCR Research
Posted on May 12, 2017

Dear friends,

People often ask me why we set GCRI up as a think tank instead of something for more direct action at reducing the risk. The reason is that when it comes to the global catastrophic risks, a little bit of well-designed research goes a long way. It helps us make better decisions about how to reduce the risks.

For example, last week I attended a political science workshop at Yale University on how to cost-effectively spend $10 billion to reduce the probability of war between …