Why tech billionaires are building bunkers

Key points from article :

Reports suggest that tech billionaires like Mark Zuckerberg are quietly preparing for disaster, with underground shelters and remote compounds built to survive potential global catastrophes. Zuckerberg’s 1,400-acre Hawaiian estate reportedly includes a self-sustaining shelter, while other Silicon Valley elites such as LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman have purchased properties in remote locations like New Zealand for “apocalypse insurance.” Their motives range from fears of war and climate collapse to more futuristic concerns—like the potential dangers posed by artificial intelligence.

At the heart of this anxiety lies the rapid progress of AI. Figures such as Ilya Sutskever, co-founder and chief scientist at OpenAI, have reportedly warned that the development of artificial general intelligence (AGI)—machines that can think like humans—may be imminent. Other tech leaders, including Sam Altman, Demis Hassabis, and Dario Amodei, predict AGI could arrive within the decade, while critics like Professor Wendy Hall argue such claims are premature. For some believers, AGI could unlock an era of prosperity and abundance; for others, it could trigger humanity’s downfall.

Governments are beginning to respond to these perceived risks, with initiatives like the UK’s AI Safety Institute and earlier U.S. executive orders requiring companies to share safety data. But many experts remain skeptical about AGI itself. Cambridge’s Professor Neil Lawrence dismisses the concept as a myth, comparing it to the impossible idea of an “Artificial General Vehicle.” He and others argue that the real challenge is not controlling hypothetical super-intelligent machines, but ensuring today’s AI systems—already capable of influencing healthcare, politics, and daily life—are developed responsibly and for the public good.

Despite claims that AI could one day outthink humans, scientists point out that machines still lack fundamental qualities such as consciousness and self-awareness. Large language models can mimic knowledge and creativity but cannot “know that they know” or adapt meaningfully as humans do. For now, the greatest danger may not be an AI apocalypse, but the social, ethical, and economic consequences of the technologies already in our hands—while a few of the world’s richest prepare for the worst underground.