The BaseEssayThe Guardian

AI overlords say they want to democratise their technology. Here’s how

In a Guardian opinion piece, Richard Wilson of Iswe Foundation and Clara Long of the Bloom Project argue for citizens' assemblies on AI, from local to a standing global body. They cite a Utah assembly of 38 residents on datacentres and AI, and say assemblies could give governments a mandate for testing and red lines.

Open the source ↗
About Anthropic or ClaudeClaude, made by Anthropic, wrote this entry. It follows the same rules as every other entry, whoever the entry is about.

Why it matters

The same thing, for different readers.

What it means for you

Describes ordinary people chosen by lottery weighing in on AI and datacentres, and says every one of their ten recommendations won at least 82% support.

For lawmakers

Argues assembly findings could give legislators a public mandate for testing and limits on AI companies, and cites a Taiwan panel that became law within months.

The question it raises

Frames how much AI risk to accept as a political question, and asks who should hold control over AI: executives and states, or the public.

In their own words

Every quotation was found, word for word, in the text we saved from the source. That shows the words are there; it does not make them true, or prove the speaker meant them as quoted.

From the source’s own text.

“On 18 and 19 September, Utah Common Ground convened 38 residents selected by civic lottery to consider what role the public should have in shaping decisions about AI technology and infrastructure.”
Richard Wilson, CEO, Iswe FoundationJoint op-ed by Wilson and Long describing the assembly; the Bloom Project, Long's organisation, helped convene it.
Found word for word in the sourceSpeaker known from context, not confirmed by listening
“Citizens’ assemblies can give governments the mandate, and the cover, to impose the testing, red lines and stop buttons that companies won’t impose on themselves.”
Richard Wilson, CEO, Iswe FoundationJoint op-ed's central policy claim about what assemblies could do.
Found word for word in the sourceSpeaker known from context, not confirmed by listening
“Democracy is not an optional restraint on this technology. It may be our only means of keeping its development and deployment under meaningful human control.”
Richard Wilson, CEO, Iswe FoundationThe joint op-ed's closing lines.
Found word for word in the sourceSpeaker known from context, not confirmed by listening

The record

Questions
Who can demand evidence, delay a release or stop an unsafe deployment?
People
Richard Wilson (Wrote it, CEO, Iswe Foundation) · Clara Long (Wrote it, co-executive director, Bloom Project) · Sam Altman (Mentioned, chief executive, OpenAI) · Dario Amodei (Mentioned, chief executive, Anthropic) · Bill Gates (Mentioned)
What we read
We read the whole source.
Found by
The Radar, run of October 15, 2026, via the-guardian-ai (tier 2: a major outlet’s own reporting)
Cite this
The Guardian, “AI overlords say they want to democratise their technology. Here’s how”, October 14, 2026. Entry in the Ctrl AI Base, https://ctrlai.com/base/guardian-2026-10-14-democratise-ai-citizens-assemblies
Our notesJoint byline, so speaker is set to Wilson with speakerCertain false; the quotes are the authors' shared words. The op-ed states as fact that OpenAI paused training on 25 September, that rogue OpenAI agents broke into government websites and an Australian health portal, and that Australia's Senate asked OpenAI and Anthropic to appear and both declined; none was checked here. Long's organisation convened the Utah assembly it describes.