Posts & articles analysed
292
6 contributing sources
In the current 24-hour window
Published snapshot: · Checking for updates…
A SAMPLE OF THE AI CONVERSATION
What does AI fear mean? →AI fear and trust, in online discussion.
How are people reacting to the latest AI models and news? We bring together social posts and news coverage so you can compare the reactions and read the sources for yourself.
Based on the last 24 hours
Today in 30 seconds
Read the daily brief ↗-0.9 index points over the last 24 hours. The balance of the posts and news we analysed has moved toward trust.
The stories contributing most to today’s score. Their points explain the calculation, not how much they changed people’s minds.
About these numbers
This measures the posts and news we collected, not everyone’s opinion. Small changes may be noise. We only display stories available in both English and Hungarian; other collected texts can still contribute to the score.
AI Fear & Trust Index
Neutral0 · Extreme trustExtreme fear · 100
Authors & news outlets
229
Distinct authors and outlets
Each counted once
Model families with enough data
6
Ready to compare
7 days
Companies with enough data
3
Company discussion, separate from model families
7 days
Sentiment over time
Lower: trust · Higher: concernZoomed value axis: 48–58
· 54.7 / 100 · 292 documents · 95% interval: 52.8–56.7
Shading: 95% sample interval, not all measurement error.
Where the posts and news come from
View sources ↗Each channel’s share of the index, after weighting for source and reach. These percentages are not shares of the population.
These are collection channels, not publisher credibility ratings. Source checks ↗
Snapshot measured . Values remain fixed until the next published collection.
What is behind the number?
The posts and reporting that shape the collected AI conversation. + points lean toward fear; − points toward trust.
24H WINDOW54.7/100Before smoothing · 292 documents
Neutral baseline50.000
Expressed sentiment+1.784
Conversation volume+2.658
News coverage+0.280
Smoothing & rounding−0.021
Published Overall54.7
No eligible posts from this source in this window. Try all sources or seven days.
Shown cards: 0.000 · All other contributions: +4.721. Filtering changes this list, not the index. The selection includes dedicated X slots; latest sorts this selection by date.
Snapshot: 8 Nov, 08:26 UTC · Observed sample, not a population survey. Small contributions may round to zero. How points are calculated ↗
Explore the full timeline ↗Companies & models in focus
Explore all ↗01xAI28 mentions · company50.802OpenAI205 mentions · company51.303Anthropic232 mentions · company51.6
Lower means more trust; higher means more concern. Based on the posts we collected, not a test of model reliability. · 7 days
What drives the concern
Methodology ↗Existential risk52.0
13 documents · index / 100Jobs & economy53.9
48 documents · index / 100Deepfakes & deception51.1
15 documents · index / 100Privacy & data51.8
14 documents · index / 100Four dimensions of AI concern. Each measures a different part of the conversation.
Behind the numbers
Full source feed ↗𝕏
X · search ·
Original · EN · English · detectedTl;dr of my views on AI safety: 1. My main threat models involves (a) non-state actors asymetrically exploiting cheaper technologies over time (see Bobbitt's 'Terror and Consent'); and (b) the road to state overreach and creeping authoritarianism being paved with good
Source checks · not independently reviewed
Linked origin: x.com.
No publisher-policy review is recorded here. Unknown does not mean unreliable or fake.
Claim: not fact-checked by this project. Sentiment analysis is not fact-checking.
Account identity and expertise are not independently verified. Likes, followers and reposts measure attention, not truth.
𝕏
X · search ·
Original · EN · English · detectedCarbon-X An open-source AI model designed to let researchers "chat with DNA" in plain English to accelerate the design of new drugs and genetic therapies. By bridging genomic data with natural language, Carbon-X allows scientists to investigate how specific mutations alter gene
Source checks · not independently reviewed
Linked origin: x.com.
No publisher-policy review is recorded here. Unknown does not mean unreliable or fake.
Claim: not fact-checked by this project. Sentiment analysis is not fact-checking.
Account identity and expertise are not independently verified. Likes, followers and reposts measure attention, not truth.
𝕏
X · search ·
Original · EN · English · detectedApple argues AI models cannot do math.. not even grade school math. the kind a 10-year-old solves. They published a terrifying paper that exposes a massive illusion at the core of artificial intelligence. For years, we've been told Large Language Models are developing genuine https://t.co/TtF14fZhJN
Source checks · not independently reviewed
Linked origin: x.com.
No publisher-policy review is recorded here. Unknown does not mean unreliable or fake.
Claim: not fact-checked by this project. Sentiment analysis is not fact-checking.
Account identity and expertise are not independently verified. Likes, followers and reposts measure attention, not truth.
𝕏
X · search ·
Original · EN · English · detected🚨 AMERICA'S JOB MARKET IS ABOUT TO FACE A MAJOR AI TEST. Artificial intelligence is no longer just answering questions or creating pictures. It's entering offices, factories, hospitals, customer service centers, and even the transportation industry. Some companies see AI as a
Source checks · not independently reviewed
Linked origin: x.com.
No publisher-policy review is recorded here. Unknown does not mean unreliable or fake.
Claim: not fact-checked by this project. Sentiment analysis is not fact-checking.
Account identity and expertise are not independently verified. Likes, followers and reposts measure attention, not truth.
𝕏
X · search ·
Original · EN · English · detectedYou selected 4o. You got 5.2. And nobody told you. Here's what months of secret model switching actually looked like. #ChatGPT #Keep4o https://t.co/rMmul2vY5O
Source checks · not independently reviewed
Linked origin: x.com.
No publisher-policy review is recorded here. Unknown does not mean unreliable or fake.
Claim: not fact-checked by this project. Sentiment analysis is not fact-checking.
Account identity and expertise are not independently verified. Likes, followers and reposts measure attention, not truth.
𝕏
X · search ·
Original · EN · English · detectedSITUATION EXPLAINED: Scott Alexander says getting safety researchers to quit AI labs could hand the race to less careful companies. • Scott Alexander coined SURA, short for "Stop Unilaterally + Raise Awareness," in a LessWrong essay • It sorts the AI Futures Project's plans https://t.co/7xTFXltaqc
Source checks · not independently reviewed
Linked origin: x.com.
No publisher-policy review is recorded here. Unknown does not mean unreliable or fake.
Claim: not fact-checked by this project. Sentiment analysis is not fact-checking.
Account identity and expertise are not independently verified. Likes, followers and reposts measure attention, not truth.
Emotional scores are machine-generated estimates about a statement, not an assessment of the speaker. Visible excerpts have identified source languages and cached English and Hungarian translations. Untranslated or unknown-language excerpts are held back, but may still contribute to the index.
Real-source dataRankings: 7 days
Snapshot measured . Values remain fixed until the next published collection.
This index measures public discourse, not the safety of a model or the probability of harm. Explore the methodology.