Two AI futures: a deity controlled by a few, or agents directed by everyone

Who manages the agents?

Gavriel Cohen frames the AI future as a choice between a deity run by a small technical clergy and a world where billions direct their own agents. He catalogs safety restrictions from 2024–2026: Claude Mythos 5 is available only to approved organizations, GPT-5.6 launched with roughly 20 government-vetted partners, and a US export-control order later disabled Fable 5 and Mythos 5 globally. Cohen argues these controls, initially justified by bio and cyber risks, are expanding to math and creative capabilities, and worries that cures for cancer or aging will be gatekept. The post does not propose a concrete fix but firmly advocates the human-centered amplifier path.

Why it matters: A well-argued opinion piece with concrete access-restriction examples, not just rhetoric. Hits all three HKR axes but is commentary, not a hard news break — lands in the 78-84 band. Not scored higher because the author is NanoCo's CEO with a product stake; readers should apply...