On Tuesday at 1pm, students in Boston shut their laptops, left their lecture halls and marched to the Massachusetts State House. They came from MIT, Harvard, Northeastern, Tufts and Boston University, among the world's most renowned universities for technology.
Their message: stop. Or at least, pause.
What happened
The rally was part of a national day called "Walkout to Freeze AI". According to the organisers, students from more than 50 campuses across the United States took part, from Boston to Washington, where Howard University mobilised.
The movement is led by Irreplaceable, a campaign group pushing for federal legislation, and backed by a coalition of environmental, feminist and consumer associations and a large nurses' union.
What they are demanding
A freeze on AI development, long enough to better understand its risks and put solid safeguards in place.
A voice for the public. The protesters believe that decisions which will change everyone's lives are being taken by a handful of companies, without sufficient democratic oversight.
A share of the benefits. They are calling for the wealth created by AI to also benefit those whose work it is transforming.
Their concerns cover jobs, the economy, democracy, the environment and safety. One of the organisers summed it up: these students were told all their lives that their degrees would guarantee them stable employment, and they now see that promise wavering.
Their anger echoes the figures: in France too, young graduates are the first to be affected in jobs exposed to AI. And the movement was born shortly after the highly publicised departure of a researcher from Anthropic, who accused his company and OpenAI of acting irresponsibly, as we explained in our article on whistleblowers.
Between 1811 and 1816, in England, textile workers smashed weaving machines. They were called the Luddites, and their name has become synonymous with blind rejection of progress. Historians have nevertheless nuanced this portrait: many of them did not oppose the machines themselves, but the way they were used to cut wages and eliminate skilled jobs, with nothing given in return. Their question, who benefits from progress, looks very much like the one American students are asking today.
The objections
Is an AI freeze possible? Its critics doubt it. The technology is being developed worldwide, and a pause in the United States might simply leave the field open to other countries, notably China. Others point to the expected benefits of AI, in medicine or science, which a freeze would delay.
Many, including some who share the students' concerns, argue instead for strict rules rather than a halt. That is, moreover, the path some elected officials are taking: the governor of Massachusetts has called for independent safety evaluations and transparency requirements for the most powerful models.
What to take away
For the first time, opposition to AI is taking the form of an organised student movement, with marches, slogans and allies. The freeze it demands has little chance of being adopted. But it is bringing into the streets a question long reserved for specialists.
A question we devote our reflection this evening to: who should decide the future of AI?