Show Notes
Jack chats with Sebastian Mallaby, senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, about his new book The Infinity Machine: Demis Hassabis, DeepMind, and the Quest for Superintelligence. They discuss current challenges in AI safety, the U.S.-China race and prospects for cooperation, and the emerging risks posed by powerful new models like Anthropic’s Mythos. They also talk about tensions between frontier labs and the U.S. government, and the trajectory toward greater government control. Mentioned: * Sebastian Mallaby, The Infinity Machine: Demis Hassabis, DeepMind, and the Quest for Superintelligence (2026) Thumbnail: President Trump delivers remarks at the White House AI Summit in Washington, D.C., Wednesday, July 23, 2025. (Official White House Photo by Joyce N. Boghosian) Consider becoming a free or paid subscriber to Executive Functions.
This is an edited transcript of an episode of “Executive Functions Chat.” You can listen to the full conversation by following or subscribing to the show on Substack, Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. Jack Goldsmith: Today I’m chatting with Sebastian Mallaby, who’s a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and an acclaimed biographer and writer. And we’re going to be talking about his newest book, which is called The Infinity Machine. Sebastian, thanks for talking with me. Sebastian Mallaby: Thank you, Jack. Nice to be with you. So tell us what the book is about. Who is Demis Hassabis, and why did you write a book about him? So the book is about artificial intelligence, and it’s centered on this character, Demis Hassabis, who is, in a way, the OG sort of AI lab leader, right? He starts DeepMind, this startup in London, back in 2010, before AI could even recognize the photograph of a cat—like nothing worked. It was full AI winter. So this is five years before Sam Altman and Elon Musk start OpenAI. It’s fully 11 years before Anthropic gets started. So he was extremely early. So if you wanted to tell the story of the making of modern AI through a personality, you know, Demis’s career and intellectual development maps perfectly onto that story. So the thing that’s most interesting to me about him is that, as you emphasize in the book, his real interest in this, I think it’s fair to say, is scientific and not profit-making. And he, at least at the outset, and I think even today, has a rather idealistic—to me anyway, idealistic or optimistic—conception of the technology and how it can be used. But the story I also see is someone who—and I don’t mean this uncharitably—but who has basically engaged in a series of compromises or fudges with regard to those values as he’s gotten deeper and deeper into the AI competition. So is that fair? And can you talk about that arc? Yes. I mean, he started DeepMind in 2010 with an absolute focus on AI safety. In fact, he met his scientific co-founder, Shane Legg, at a safety lecture in which Shane projected that by 2030 or so, AIs would be sophisticated enough—cleverer than humans—have their own sort of objective functions, and would maybe start to threaten humans. And this was the lecture over which they bonded. And then in 2014, Demis Hassabis sells his company DeepMind to Google. And part of the sale condition was that AI would not be used for military purposes, that it would be safeguarded by a sort of ethics oversight committee that would be separate from the corporate leadership of Google. So he took it very seriously. And then this continues for a while. Between 2016 and 2019, he wages a secret battle, a thing called Project Mario, where he’s trying to put pressure on Google’s leadership to have this independent safety oversight board, because Google kind of reneged on the deal at the point of sale in 2014. And then after 2019, it kind of fades away. And, you know, by now you have Google being willing to provide AI to the national security establishment. In the US, there is no safety and ethics oversight board. And Demis is
More from Executive Functions Chat
Bob Bauer and Jack Goldsmith discuss Jack’s October 19 piece on Senator Elissa Slotkin’s recent viral remarks at the University of Chicago, where she said she wanted accountability for the people who enabled President Trump, at least in part with the goal of sending a “deterrence message” to new graduates who might consider working for the administration. Jack explains why he thinks Senator Slotkin’s remarks were imprudent, and why he finds the prevailing reaction from pro-Trump quarters hypocritical. Bob presses on whether congressional investigation is different from weaponizing law enforcement, and whether worry about retaliation could lead to the most lawless conduct going unanswered. They also discuss Jack’s prediction that Trump will issue thousands of pardons, his case for prioritizing transparency, and why it is, and will continue to be, incredibly challenging for either side to de-escalate.
Bob Bauer interviews Francis Fukuyama, the Olivier Nomellini Senior Fellow at Stanford’s Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and author of The End of History and the Last Man. They discuss his new memoir, In the Realm of the Last Man, which, among other things, seeks to address misconceptions about the argument for which he is best known and to depict his intellectual arc; how excessive proceduralism fetters American government and drives voters toward populist candidates; whether reform would take a crisis; why Fukuyama posits that the post-Trump years may bring civil service and permitting reforms that were previously out of reach; and the necessity of educating young people on liberal values. Bauer and Fukuyama close by discussing changing one’s mind: the psychological barriers to it (particularly in an insular group setting), the liberation that expressing it can bring, and the interpersonal costs it involved in the case of Fukuyama’s departure from the neoconservative movement.
Jack interviews attorney and historian Catherine Grace Katz about her new book, Shadow Before the Flame: The Hindenburg Disaster and the Prelude to War. They discuss how a 1925 U.S. ban on helium exports required German airships to fly on flammable hydrogen, leading to the famous 1937 explosion over New Jersey. They also cover the Nazi takeover of the struggling Zeppelin company and the subsequent use of its airships as propaganda tools, and the later controversy surrounding whether to sell helium to Germany even after Congress relaxed the export ban. Katz closes by noting parallels to AI and other dual-use technologies, the necessity of balancing civilian risk against potential benefits, and the hubris that often accompanies large-scale innovation.
Bob interviews Nate Persily, the James B. McClatchy Professor of Law at Stanford Law School and co-director of the Stanford Law AI Initiative, about artificial intelligence and democracy, with particular attention to elections. They discuss what’s driving American anxiety about AI, why Republican and Democratic users alike rate AI models as left of center, and why Persily thinks the greater danger from deepfakes is not voters who are fooled but voters who stop believing what’s true—the “liar’s dividend.” They also take up the risks of relying on chatbots for voting information, state laws requiring disclosure of AI in political ads, and why Persily, though not “an unrepentant doomer,” thinks the time to regulate AI may be running out rapidly.
Bob Bauer interviews Tammy Patrick, Chief Executive Officer for Programs at the Election Center and former Federal Compliance Officer for the Maricopa County Elections Department, about how election officials are preparing for the midterm elections. They discuss differences between an imperfect election and an illegitimate one, the decentralized patchwork of thousands of local offices that administers the vote, the checks set up to constrain partisan officials or rogue insiders, and why federal intervention now tops the list of concerns for many officials. Tammy closes with advice for voters: make a plan, vote early, and don’t mistake a slow count for a rigged one.