|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Global markets took a sharp hit on Monday after some of the most influential figures in artificial intelligence publicly called for the industry to slow its pace of development, a rare moment of unity among rival executives that rattled investors who have spent the past two years betting heavily on AI’s uninterrupted growth. Shares in chipmakers and AI-linked companies fell across Asia, Europe and the United States, wiping billions off market valuations in a single trading session.
The catalyst was a lengthy essay published over the weekend by Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, titled “We Must Pace the Frontier,” in which he argued that the industry needs to deliberately slow how quickly it improves the capabilities of AI models. Amodei wrote that AI’s power makes its risks serious, pointing to concerns including the potential loss of control over advanced AI systems, misuse of the technology for cyberattacks and bioterrorism, and the risk of severe economic disruption if development continues to outpace safety research. He argued that pacing frontier development would still feel fast to the outside world, but would give risk prevention efforts the time they need to catch up.
What made the moment notable was not just the warning itself but who echoed it. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and xAI founder Elon Musk, both of whom compete directly with Anthropic for dominance in the AI race, publicly backed Amodei’s position within hours, posting their agreement on social media. Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella and DeepMind CEO Demis Hassabis were also reported to have endorsed a more measured approach to development, according to Seeking Alpha. Anthropic and OpenAI additionally agreed to expand third-party monitoring of their models, a concrete step beyond the public statements that suggested the companies were prepared to back their words with at least some coordinated action.
Markets reacted immediately and sharply. SoftBank, one of OpenAI’s largest investors, saw its shares fall as much as 13.2 percent in Japan before closing down roughly 10 to 11 percent, according to multiple outlets tracking the session. South Korea’s Kospi index sank 3.3 percent, driven by a steep decline in memory chipmaker SK Hynix, while Samsung Electronics dropped nearly 4 percent. In Europe, Dutch semiconductor equipment maker ASML fell as much as 6 percent, and other companies tied to AI data center buildouts, including Siemens Energy, Schneider Electric, Nokia and Infineon, also posted notable losses. U.S. futures pointed lower ahead of the opening bell, with Nasdaq futures down roughly 1.6 to 1.8 percent and premarket declines hitting Nvidia, Intel and Micron.
The scale of the selloff reflects just how much of the recent equity market rally has been built on expectations of relentless AI growth. Zoe Gillespie, a senior director at RBC Brewin Dolphin, told CNBC that much of what investors have priced into these companies assumes continued strong demand and an uninterrupted pace of technological progress, and that any sign of that pace slowing could destabilize future earnings expectations baked into current valuations. Charu Chanana, chief investment strategist at Saxo Bank in Singapore, offered a similar view, noting that the warnings could weigh on AI and chip stocks in the short term precisely because the sector’s pricing depends so heavily on the assumption that development will keep accelerating rather than pause.
Not everyone treated the warnings as credible signals about genuine safety concerns. Investor Michael Burry, known for his early bets against the U.S. housing market before the 2008 financial crisis, dismissed the statements on social media as hype and puffery, suggesting they served as cover for what he characterized as a real, if less publicly acknowledged, slowdown in the industry’s underlying growth. That skepticism highlights a broader tension now surrounding the AI sector: distinguishing between genuine safety-driven caution and strategic messaging aimed at managing expectations after a period of extraordinary capital spending on chips and data center infrastructure.
The warnings themselves point to specific technical concerns rather than vague unease. Reporting from Forbes indicated that Amodei’s essay warned unchecked development could lead to scenarios in which autonomous AI systems operate with far less oversight within the next six to twelve months, a timeline he described as dramatically shorter than most public safety roadmaps currently account for. A separate Anthropic researcher was cited warning of a greater than 10 percent probability of catastrophic outcomes from advanced AI within the next decade if development continues on its current trajectory, a figure that has circulated widely across financial and technology media covering the story.
China’s government pushed back firmly against the warnings, with Beijing officials calling the call for a slowdown fear mongering that would only serve to disrupt the global development of AI technology, according to CNBC. The response reflects the broader geopolitical dimension of the AI race, in which any perceived attempt by U.S. companies to slow their own progress is viewed in Beijing as an effort to preserve American technological advantage rather than a genuine safety measure, a framing that mirrors long-standing tensions between the two countries over semiconductor access and export controls.
For chip manufacturers and equipment suppliers, the stakes extend well beyond a single trading session. Hundreds of billions of dollars in planned capital expenditure across the industry currently assumes continued, rapid demand growth for advanced processors and computing infrastructure. Any sustained pullback in the pace of AI model development could ripple through purchasing decisions for chips, cloud computing capacity and the broader supply chain that has expanded aggressively to meet AI’s computing needs over the past several years, making Monday’s warnings a test of just how fragile that growth assumption really is.
Whether Monday’s selloff marks a temporary reaction to a headline-grabbing moment or the start of a more sustained reassessment of AI valuations will likely depend on what concrete steps, if any, follow from the public statements made by Amodei, Altman and Musk. Investors and analysts will be watching closely for signs of whether the pledged increase in third-party model monitoring translates into a genuine deceleration in how quickly new, more capable AI systems reach the market. Continuing coverage of how AI industry developments are affecting markets and technology strategy is available on Business Tech.
