African Voices Weigh AI’s Risks Beyond Human Extinction

Eight people from five groups have offered differing views on whether increasingly capable artificial intelligence could eventually threaten humanity, with many focusing on present-day risks rather than the possibility of human extinction.

The perspectives came from everyday users, educators, innovators, a policy expert and an investor. Their concerns included excessive dependence on AI, misinformation, bias, labour displacement, unsafe deployment and inadequate oversight.

Concerns about dependence and misuse

Sarah Pra, a restaurant owner in Kumasi, Ghana, uses Meta AI and ChatGPT for cooking guidance, restaurant flyers and personal questions. She questioned the idea that commonly used systems would eventually kill humans, asking: “Which AI is going to kill us exactly? Is it ChatGPT or Meta AI?”

Elijah Akuma, a master’s student at the University of Nigeria, Nsukka, uses AI to test ideas, critique drafts and suggest improvements. He said the prospect of AI killing everyone was unrealistic because the technology was created by humans and still had limitations.

Akuma said his greater concern was people becoming too dependent on AI, particularly students who use it for almost everything. “I worry that the overdependence on AI will make their thinking degenerate into a pitiable state,” he said.

Aniedi Akpan, Head of Careers and Team Lead for Relationship Management at 16 Plus Schools in Lagos, also focused on how people use the technology. She said AI can be confidently wrong, reproduce bias and produce convincing information without genuine understanding.

“I am less worried about students using AI than I am about students using it without understanding what it is doing,” Akpan said. She identified warfare, misinformation, cybercrime, surveillance and inequality as areas where human decisions could make AI more dangerous.

Jobs, safeguards and governance

Abiodun Adetona, an AI developer and founder of Decide AI, said the risks extend beyond an extinction scenario. His company helps users analyse spreadsheets and business data through natural-language prompts.

Adetona warned that millions of people could be displaced from their jobs without alternatives, creating serious political and economic consequences. He said increasingly capable AI agents should face controls over what they can access, which actions they can take and what requires human approval.

“The more consequential the action, the stronger the controls around it should be,” he said.

Kelvin Roman, founder of Daraja AI, said the most significant risks would arise from how humans design, deploy and govern AI systems. Daraja AI develops tools and infrastructure for African languages and contexts, including an AI system called Babel.

Roman said AI could reinforce bias, spread misinformation and make critical errors at scale without being independently hostile to humanity. He said Daraja AI uses safety checks, testing protocols and transparent oversight, and does not allow Babel to generate harmful content, violate privacy or support illegal activities.

“The real risk comes from how humans design, deploy, and govern these systems,” Roman said. “Public safety always comes first.”

Pius Bankong, an investment associate at Africa-focused venture capital firm Oui Capital, described AI as “a force multiplier”. He said its effects would depend on corporate governance, policies, safeguards and organisational choices, comparing the issue with the way nuclear energy can produce different outcomes depending on how it is managed.

Calls for preparation and alignment

Kayode Adeniyi, an AI policy expert and PhD researcher at Imperial College London, said AI alignment research was needed to help ensure advanced systems follow human intentions and values. His research focuses on machine learning for sensors that monitor global water risk.

Adeniyi said many African governments were concentrating on AI adoption, infrastructure and development while paying less attention to safety and evaluation. He called for greater investment in talent covering AI safety, research, engineering and evaluation.

He also offered a hypothetical example of the danger posed by a system that was not aligned with human values, stressing the importance of understanding and controlling advanced AI behaviour.

Warnings from outside the group reinforce the uncertainty surrounding the debate. Jacob Coxon, a former Anthropic researcher, resigned from the company and warned that AI firms were racing towards self-improving systems. OpenAI chief scientist Jakub Pachocki has also warned that no one is prepared for the consequences of a continued rapid rise in machine intelligence.

A 2026 study by Patience Ebekeyi Bakre and Fa’iza Tukur-Bello, published by Springer in Discover Education, surveyed 535 students across eight Nigerian tertiary institutions. It examined academic uses of tools including ChatGPT, Grammarly and Gemini for coding, essay writing, finding materials and summarising information.

Together, the views present human extinction as a debated possibility rather than an established or inevitable outcome, while underscoring the need for responsible use, safeguards and public oversight as AI capabilities develop.