Eliezer Yudkowsky

Personal reference note · last reviewed 12 Aug 2026

Born 11 September 1979, Chicago. American AI researcher, decision theorist, writer. Central figure in the rationalist community. Co-founder and research fellow, Machine Intelligence Research Institute (MIRI).

One-line orientation

Autodidact who helped invent the modern AI-alignment conversation, founded LessWrong, and now argues publicly that building superintelligence with present techniques will most likely kill everyone.

Background

Raised in an Orthodox Jewish family. No formal high-school or university education; describes himself as entirely self-taught. Treats writings from 2001 and earlier as the product of a different person. Early involvement in online transhumanist and singularity discussion lists in the late 1990s.

Moved to Atlanta in 2000 to help launch the Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence (later MIRI). Later based in the Bay Area.

Institutions and roles

Core technical and conceptual contributions

Major writings

Current public position on AI risk

Maintains that current machine-learning methods do not provide reliable control over the goals of systems that exceed human intelligence across domains. Default outcome of creating artificial superintelligence under present techniques and incentives is human extinction. Has publicly cited probabilities in the high 90s percent range (e.g., 99.5 % in interviews around the 2025 book).

Advocates strong international coordination to halt or tightly regulate development of systems that could reach superintelligence with existing approaches.

Influence and dissent

Widely credited by figures inside major labs: Sam Altman has said Yudkowsky was “critical in the decision to start OpenAI.” Early introductions helped bring funding to DeepMind. Nick Bostrom’s Superintelligence (2014) drew on the intelligence-explosion framing.

Counter-views are common among researchers who assign lower probabilities to abrupt, uncontrollable takeoff, who believe incremental empirical alignment work is more promising, or who reject the strong form of the orthogonality thesis. Public disagreement has been visible with researchers at OpenAI, Anthropic, and academic groups since at least 2022–2023.

Personal notes (local only)

Open questions I still want answered