AI for Science

Playwright Alan Ayckbourn's latest work, The Trial of Romeo Oscar, stages a courtroom drama in which a robot stands trial for murder. The play is being discussed alongside commentary in the net.wars column 'What's in a name', which examines its take on robotics, naming, and science fiction themes.

Ning Xu's entry won Nikon Instruments' Small World in Motion microscopy video competition, but it has been ruled ineligible after organizers determined it used generative AI. A contest spokesperson confirmed the disqualification to Gizmodo. The case is drawing attention as scientific imaging contests grapple with how to judge entries created with AI tools.

Physicist and science commentator Sabine Hossenfelder has published a new piece, shared via Science for the Wonder of Growth, laying out three reasons biologists say artificial intelligence systems are not conscious, at least not yet. The argument feeds an ongoing scientific debate about whether current AI models can have subjective experience or merely simulate intelligent behaviour.

A Bulletin essay argues that alarmist claims about artificial intelligence wiping out humanity rest on weak science, and that this doom rhetoric actually benefits major AI companies. The piece says scare narratives justify concentrated corporate control, regulatory barriers, and heavy investment, letting dominant firms shape policy while the technology's real, present harms get less attention.

The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists warns that artificial intelligence does not need to reach superintelligence or act out of malice to set off a nuclear conflict. Ordinary failures—miscalibration, false alarms, misinterpreted data, or humans over-relying on automated systems in minutes-long decision windows—could be enough. The argument reframes AI nuclear risk around mundane systemic errors rather than Hollywood-style rogue machines.