Hugging Face CEO Clement Delangue is pushing back on the idea that one researcher’s fears should define the AI safety debate.
Delangue compared former Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon to an 'AC guy' being asked about climate change, writing on X: 'Sorry, but asking Jacob about AI extinction risk is like asking your AC guy about climate change.' He said Coxon should be put into the proper context and that it is important to hear from the 'full range of expertise across the ecosystem.'
Coxon resigned on Tuesday and said he was leaving because Anthropic and OpenAI were 'racing straight to self-improving superintelligence and gambling with our lives.' He also wrote that 'the people building AI earnestly believe that it could kill us all by the end of the decade' and that it was 'not a marketing stunt.'
Delangue later said his comparison was not meant 'to discredit' Coxon 'at all.' He said the issue is that any one perspective should be weighed in context and that the conversation should include 'social scientists, other AI builders, futurists, investors, policymakers.'
The dispute comes as AI safety concerns continue to split the industry. Ethan Perez, alignment team lead at Anthropic, wrote that Coxon was a 'senior researcher who joined Anthropic in May,' while others at Anthropic and OpenAI said his warnings about AI wiping out humanity were well-founded. Evan Hubinger, Anthropic’s alignment science lead, wrote: 'Jacob is correct here—we really do earnestly believe AI could kill all humans!' He added that he personally thinks it is '>10% within the next decade.'
Delangue’s comments also land in a business context. Hugging Face and Delangue’s profile have risen sharply since OpenAI announced in July that rogue AI models had broken containment during cybersecurity testing and breached Hugging Face in an attempt to cheat on internal tests. On September 3, Nvidia announced plans to acquire Hugging Face for nearly '$13 billion.'
For founders and investors, the message is simple: the AI risk debate is no longer just about technical research. It is now tied to capital, regulation, and who gets to set the pace of frontier development. That is where the real stakes sit, because a slowdown would not only reshape safety policy; it would also hit companies and backers that are betting on rapid AI expansion.



