The work of academics and researchers has made most of our lives healthier, more productive, and more enjoyable. I have lived about fifteen years beyond the life expectancy of a male born in my birth year. To me, that is compelling evidence of the value of science.

My grandmother travelled from Glasgow to Vancouver early in the twentieth century. Between the ocean voyage and the train journey from Canada’s East Coast to the West, the trip took eleven days. Late in her life, she boarded a Douglas DC-8 in Vancouver and stepped onto Scottish soil less than half a day later. She was intensely proud to have witnessed—and benefited from—such extraordinary technological progress. To her, it was almost unbelievable.

I have always shared my grandmother’s admiration for technical advances. In some fields, however, admiration has increasingly given way to reservation.

The growing capabilities of artificial intelligence offer worthwhile benefits, but they also introduce powerful and imperfect systems capable of causing serious harm. These systems may begin influencing important decisions faster than we can control them.

The 2026 International AI Safety Report warns of malicious use, system malfunction, and systemic disruption. AI can make fraud, impersonation, fabrication, propaganda, and personal defamation easier, cheaper, and more convincing.

AI also threatens employment, particularly entry-level positions that have traditionally allowed people to acquire experience and begin careers. Inequality between young and old, and between rich and poor, will grow. Greater inequality will result. Addiction, social alienation, and civil unrest will intensify. Governments that serve their richest citizens will respond not by addressing the causes of social dysfunction but by imposing higher levels of repression.

These are not merely possibilities awaiting us in the future. They are realities today.

I began this short piece after reading not about artificial intelligence, but about scientists seeking ways to modify the amount of solar radiation reaching Earth.

One proposal would release sulphur dioxide or hydrogen sulphide into the atmosphere near the North and South Poles, in the hope that the gases would form reflective aerosols in the stratosphere and reduce warming.

Perhaps the proposal would work. Perhaps it would produce unintended consequences extending far beyond the polar regions. The full environmental effects are uncertain, as are questions of fairness, responsibility, and who would have the authority to alter the planet’s atmosphere.

Nevertheless, money is being sought to begin the project.

That is the connection with artificial intelligence. In both fields, technical capability is advancing faster than public understanding, democratic oversight, or agreement about who should bear the risks. The danger is not science itself. It is the willingness to deploy immensely powerful technologies before we understand their consequences—or have established who will remain in control.