Oxford computer scientist and artificial intelligence researcher Michael Wooldridge says the rapid expansion of artificial intelligence is being shaped less by scientific inevitability than by competitive pressures among a small group of technology companies racing to avoid falling behind rivals.

In an interview discussing his latest book, Life Lessons from Game Theory: The Art of Thinking Strategically in a Complex World, Wooldridge argued that many of the current tensions surrounding artificial intelligence can be understood through the framework of game theory, particularly scenarios in which competitors continue escalating despite recognizing collective risks.

Wooldridge, a professor at the University of Oxford and one of Britain’s most prominent public communicators on artificial intelligence, said the industry increasingly resembles a strategic trap in which companies continue investing heavily in advanced systems because they believe competitors would gain advantage if they slowed development.

“We’ve got a small number of very wealthy companies that are busy pursuing AI, while at the same time saying that they are afraid that something’s going to go horribly wrong with it,” Wooldridge said. “So why are they busy pursuing it? Because they think if we back down and we don’t pursue it, somebody else will.

”The comments come amid intensifying global competition over artificial intelligence infrastructure, computing capacity and access to data. Major technology firms including OpenAI and Google DeepMind have expanded investments in large-scale machine learning systems, while governments in the United States, Europe and China are increasingly treating AI as a strategic industry tied to economic growth and national security.

Wooldridge said many of the core technologies underpinning today’s AI systems are not recent discoveries. He noted that key neural network techniques central to modern machine learning were developed by the mid-1980s, but computing power and data limitations prevented their wider deployment at the time.

“The only obstacle standing in the way of the AI revolution in the 1980s, really, was that computers weren’t powerful enough and we didn’t have enough data,” he said.He described the emergence of GPT-3 in 2020 as a turning point driven largely by scale rather than a fundamentally new scientific breakthrough.

According to Wooldridge, many researchers initially doubted whether simply expanding computational power and training data would substantially improve performance. He said the success of that approach surprised a significant portion of the research community.

OpenAI’s development strategy demonstrated that scaling existing methods could generate major commercial results, he said, although he cautioned against interpreting those advances as evidence that artificial general intelligence, or AGI, is imminent.Executives including Sam Altman and Demis Hassabis have publicly discussed the possibility of achieving human-level general intelligence within years. Wooldridge said those forecasts remain overly optimistic.

He argued that current systems still struggle with tasks requiring physical reasoning and adaptation in unfamiliar environments. While advanced chat systems can process complex linguistic queries, he said they remain unable to reliably perform many basic real-world activities that humans execute routinely.

“You can talk to ChatGPT about quantum mechanics in Latin,” Wooldridge said, “but at the same time, we don’t have AI that could come into your house, that it had never seen before, locate the kitchen and clear the dinner table.”Wooldridge said data availability may become one of the industry’s most significant constraints.

He noted that large language models already consume enormous quantities of text and digital material, creating pressure to secure new sources of information for future training cycles.“The whole of Wikipedia made up just 3% of GPT-3’s training data,” he said. “Where do you get 10 times more data from next time around?”That search for data, he argued, could reshape relationships between governments, corporations and individuals.

Wooldridge pointed to healthcare systems, wearable devices and online content creators as examples of potentially valuable data sources for future AI development.“The NHS is sitting on a huge amount of data about human beings,” he said. “That’s the most valuable kind of data imaginable.”He warned that commercial pressure to obtain increasingly detailed behavioral information could create incentives for broader surveillance and monitoring.

Wooldridge suggested future generations of online influencers may routinely agree to extensive data collection arrangements in exchange for visibility and commercial opportunity.The professor’s latest work focuses primarily on game theory, which he defines as the study of interactions between self-interested actors.

He said many geopolitical disputes, commercial rivalries and social conflicts can be interpreted through a relatively small number of strategic models.One recurring example in his analysis is the “game of chicken,” in which opposing sides continue escalating until one party backs down or both suffer severe consequences.

Wooldridge compared the framework to current tensions involving the United States and Iran, describing unpredictability as a recognized strategic tactic within game theory.“You’ve got two sides with ever-escalating threats against each other,” he said. “Somebody’s got to back down at some point.

”Wooldridge added that highly unpredictable behavior can complicate strategic decision-making because opponents struggle to assess likely responses and risks. Under such conditions, he said, game theory often encourages actors to prepare for worst-case outcomes.He also criticized what he described as a growing “zero-sum” political mindset in parts of modern public discourse.

In game theory, he said, zero-sum situations are not merely competitions where one side wins and another loses, but systems where actors are incentivized to maximize damage to opponents.“This zero-sum mentality is very damaging,” Wooldridge said.

“One of the important lessons from game theory is that, actually, the majority of interactions that we’re in are not zero-sum.”He linked that framework to populist political narratives that portray economic or social gains by one group as direct losses for another. As an alternative, Wooldridge highlighted the “Veil of Ignorance,” a philosophical model developed by political philosopher John Rawls in 1971.

The thought experiment asks individuals to design a society without knowing which position they themselves would ultimately occupy within it.Wooldridge said the model creates incentives for fairer social systems because participants must account for the possibility of ending up disadvantaged. He noted that former U.S. presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama had both expressed interest in Rawls’ ideas.

Despite concerns surrounding AI development, Wooldridge said he remains optimistic about technology and scientific inquiry. Growing up in rural Herefordshire, he taught himself programming after repeatedly visiting a local electronics shop that displayed a TRS-80 computer in its storefront during the early 1980s.

He later completed a doctorate in artificial intelligence and went on to publish more than 500 scientific papers and multiple books, while also presenting public lectures on the social implications of AI.

Asked whether students should avoid fields vulnerable to automation, Wooldridge rejected the idea that education should be driven solely by labor market forecasts.

“I didn’t get into computing because I thought it was going to give me a good job,” he said. “I got into it because I was just really interested in it.”

According to Iran’s ISNA news agency, Araghchi was due to convey “Iran’s positions and views on the framework of any understanding to completely end the war” during fresh meetings with Pakistani officials.

The minister had visited Islamabad a day earlier, meeting Army Chief Asim Munir, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar before flying to Muscat, where he met Haitham bin Tariq as regional diplomacy intensified.Other Iranian envoys returned to Tehran for consultations and to obtain instructions related to ending the conflict, ISNA reported.

Before those talks, the White House had said Trump’s peace envoy Steve Witkoff and his son-in-law Jared Kushner were preparing to travel to Pakistan for further indirect negotiations.Trump later scrapped the trip, telling Fox News there was no reason to continue “sitting around talking about nothing,” while criticizing Tehran’s negotiating position.

“They gave us a paper that should have been better and interestingly immediately when I canceled it, within 10 minutes, we got a new paper that was much better,” Trump said, without giving details.Asked whether canceling the trip meant a return to open conflict, Trump said: “No, it doesn’t mean that. We haven’t thought about it yet.”Araghchi described his initial Pakistan visit as “very fruitful” but questioned Washington’s seriousness about diplomacy.“

Have yet to see if the U.S. is truly serious about diplomacy,” he said.Pressure for a diplomatic breakthrough has intensified as the Strait of Hormuz remains effectively blocked, disrupting one of the world’s most important oil and gas shipping routes and driving energy prices sharply higher.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said it had no intention of lifting the blockade.“Controlling the Strait of Hormuz and maintaining the shadow of its deterrent effects over America and the White House’s supporters in the region is the definitive strategy of Islamic Iran,” the Guards said on Telegram.

The United States has responded by tightening restrictions on Iranian ports and increasing maritime enforcement actions against vessels linked to Tehran’s energy exports.Iran’s military accused Washington of “blockading, banditry and piracy” and warned that continued pressure would trigger a response.

Regional tensions also escalated on the Lebanese front, where Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ordered strikes against Hezbollah targets after accusing the group of violating a ceasefire recently extended for three weeks.

Lebanese state media reported Israeli strikes in several southern districts, while Lebanon’s health ministry said attacks in Nabatieh and Bint Jbeil killed six people.Israel’s military said it had killed multiple Hezbollah operatives, including fighters allegedly transporting weapons.

Although Trump had earlier expressed optimism about peace after meetings with Israeli and Lebanese envoys, Hezbollah parliamentary bloc leader Mohammed Raad urged Lebanon to withdraw from negotiations, warning that any agreement without broader consensus would be politically unsustainable.

Araghchi is expected to travel to Moscow after completing the Islamabad consultations.

Trump said he had ordered envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner not to travel to Islamabad, where mediation efforts had been centered following the arrival of Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi for talks with Pakistani officials.

Speaking before departing Florida and later in comments to Fox News, Trump said the revised Iranian offer failed to meet U.S. expectations and dismissed the value of sending negotiators for extended talks.“I’ve told my people a little while ago they were getting ready to leave, and I said, ‘Nope, you’re not making an 18-hour flight to go there,’” Trump said, according to Fox News.

“We have all the cards. They can call us anytime they want.”In a post on Truth Social, Trump added that there was “tremendous infighting and confusion” within Iran’s leadership and said, “Nobody knows who is in charge, including them.”

The cancellation dealt a setback to mediation efforts in Islamabad, where Araghchi had concluded meetings with Pakistani leaders without direct contact with U.S. representatives.

Araghchi described the visit as “very fruitful,” while Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian told Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif that Tehran would not accept what he called “imposed negotiations” conducted under threats or blockade.

Iran urged Washington to remove operational restrictions, including measures affecting Iranian ports, while maintaining that it would not accept maximalist demands.“Principally, Iranian side will not accept maximalist demands,” an Iranian diplomatic source in Islamabad told Reuters.

Tensions remain elevated across the region despite a ceasefire currently in force after a conflict that began on Feb. 28 with U.S.-Israeli airstrikes on Iran. Tehran later launched retaliatory strikes against Israel, U.S. military bases and Gulf states, escalating fears of a broader regional war.

The standoff has also disrupted maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, a critical global energy corridor, while U.S. restrictions on Iranian oil exports remain in place, pushing energy prices to multi-year highs and adding pressure to global inflation and growth.

In Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ordered forces to strike Hezbollah targets in Lebanon “forcefully,” testing a fragile three-week ceasefire and underscoring the broader instability surrounding the negotiations.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt had said earlier that Washington had seen some progress from Iran in recent days and hoped for further movement over the weekend.Vice President JD Vance, who led an earlier unsuccessful round of indirect talks in Islamabad this month, had also been prepared to travel again if negotiations advanced.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Iran still had an opportunity to reach an agreement if it made verifiable commitments on its nuclear program.“All they have to do is abandon a nuclear weapon in meaningful and verifiable ways,” Hegseth said.

Iran’s foreign ministry later confirmed that no direct meeting with U.S. officials had been planned during Araghchi’s visit and said Tehran would instead convey its position through Pakistan as mediator.

The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO), which monitors shipping security in the region, said the cargo vessel reported being fired upon and subsequently halted in the water.

No injuries or environmental damage were reported, and the ship sustained no apparent damage.The UKMTO did not identify who carried out the second attack. However, the incident followed an earlier episode in which Iran’s paramilitary Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps was reported to have opened fire on a container ship, prompting immediate suspicion toward Tehran.

The incidents come amid heightened tensions in the Gulf, days after U.S. forces seized an Iranian container vessel following an exchange of fire and boarded an oil tanker linked to Iran’s oil trade in the Indian Ocean.

The Strait of Hormuz is a critical global transit route for energy supplies, and any disruption to shipping there is closely monitored by governments and markets worldwide.

Iranian authorities did not immediately comment on the reported attacks.

Iranian authorities said the aircraft was shot down by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ aerospace defense systems, describing the jet as “completely obliterated” and confirming that search operations were ongoing. U.S. media reported that one of the two crew members had been rescued by American special forces, while efforts continued to recover the second.

The U.S. Central Command did not immediately comment on the incident, though the White House said President Donald Trump had been briefed. In remarks to NBC, Trump said the loss would not affect ongoing negotiations with Iran, stating, “No, not at all. No, it’s war.

”Iranian state media indicated that authorities had offered a “valuable reward” for the capture of any surviving crew member, underscoring the urgency and strategic importance attached to the recovery effort.

In a separate development, Iran’s military said it had also struck a U.S. A-10 ground attack aircraft in the Gulf, while U.S. media reported that the pilot in that incident had been rescued. There was no immediate confirmation from U.S. officials.

The incident comes amid an escalating conflict that began more than a month ago following U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran that killed Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, triggering a broader regional confrontation. The conflict has disrupted economic activity across the Middle East and raised concerns over global energy security.U.S.

Central Command said earlier this week that American forces had flown more than 13,000 missions and struck over 12,300 targets during operations in Iran. Despite sustained bombardment, analysts say Iran retains operational air defense capabilities.

Behnam Ben Taleblu, a senior analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said the downing likely reflected continued effectiveness of Iran’s residual defenses. He noted that U.S. aircraft flying at lower altitudes may be more exposed to threats, adding that portable shoulder-fired missiles were a plausible cause.

Mark Cancian, a defense adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said such systems are harder to detect and could explain the aircraft loss. He described the broader U.S. air campaign as successful but noted that even limited losses can carry political consequences domestically.

Retired U.S. brigadier general Houston Cantwell said survival training for downed pilots prioritizes concealment and communication to enable recovery while avoiding capture. He added that both sides typically attempt to intercept or manipulate signals during such operations.

The downing represents the first U.S. jet loss in combat since 2003, when an aircraft was struck over Baghdad and the pilot was safely recovered. Rescue missions in contested environments often rely on helicopters, which Cantwell said are particularly vulnerable due to their slower speed and lower altitude.

The U.S. military has previously acknowledged other aircraft losses during the current conflict, including a tanker crash in Iraq and several fighter jets downed in friendly fire incidents involving allied forces.

Checkpoints staffed by security personnel and volunteers have proliferated across the capital since the conflict began, initially marked by military vehicles and road barriers. While some visible fortifications have been scaled back following recent airstrikes, residents say patrols remain widespread, with teenagers now playing an increasingly prominent role.

Witness accounts describe adolescents aged 13 to 14 manning checkpoints, stopping vehicles and conducting searches. A 28-year-old resident told AFP that she was stopped at two checkpoints in northern Tehran, where teenage boys carrying weapons inspected her phone and personal belongings without consent, calling the encounter intrusive.

Another resident said that beyond formal military checkpoints, groups of youths in private vehicles were independently stopping cars, opening doors and checking dashboards and mobile devices.Authorities have acknowledged lowering the minimum age for Basij recruitment to 12, citing high levels of interest among younger volunteers.

Rahim Nadali, an official with the Revolutionary Guards in Tehran, said on state television that the decision reflected demand from children seeking to participate in defense efforts.The Basij, an auxiliary force under the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, has historically played a central role in internal security operations.

It was also reported to have been involved in suppressing anti-government protests in January, during which thousands were killed.The expanded use of minors has drawn concern from rights groups and analysts. Some observers interpret the move as an indication of manpower shortages, while others see it as a sign of a more hardline approach by authorities seeking to consolidate control amid external and internal pressures.

Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Iran’s parliamentary speaker, urged supporters to maintain a presence on the streets, framing domestic mobilization as part of a broader strategic effort alongside military and maritime pressures, including tensions around the Strait of Hormuz.

Analysts say the intensified street presence is aimed at deterring potential unrest, particularly after calls from U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu encouraging opposition activity at the outset of the war.

In addition to checkpoint duties, pro-government groups have organized nighttime patrols, using vehicles equipped with loudspeakers to broadcast slogans and display flags in residential areas.

Hamidreza Azizi, a visiting fellow at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, said the government was increasingly reliant on a core base of ideologically committed supporters to maintain order. He noted that this strategy reflects deeper challenges to the state’s legitimacy but has proven effective in sustaining control during wartime conditions.

Human Rights Watch said the recruitment of children under 15 for military roles could constitute a war crime under international law and warned that their deployment exposes them to heightened risks, including potential targeting in military strikes.

Bill Van Esveld, the group’s associate director for children’s rights, said the policy suggested authorities were willing to endanger minors to bolster security capacity.

The statement, issued by Iran’s foreign ministry and shared with IMO member states and non-governmental organizations, said vessels that do not “participate in or support acts of aggression” against Iran would be permitted safe passage through the strategic waterway, subject to adherence to safety and security regulations.

However, it specified that vessels, equipment, and assets belonging to what it described as “aggressor parties” including the United States and Israel would not qualify for what it termed “innocent or non-hostile passage.

”Iran said responsibility for any disruption or escalation in the Strait of Hormuz lay with Washington and Tel Aviv, accusing them of waging an “unlawful and destabilising war” that has heightened risks to international shipping and regional stability.

The statement reflects Tehran’s position as tensions remain elevated following the outbreak of war triggered by U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran on February 28.

The Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most critical maritime chokepoints, has been effectively closed since the escalation, contributing to sharp increases in global oil and gas prices.

Iran’s conditional reopening for select vessels introduces limited operational clarity for commercial shipping, though the exclusion of U.S. and Israeli-linked assets underscores the continuing strategic and geopolitical risks in the region.

Sharif, writing on social media platform X, said Pakistan would be “ready and honoured” to facilitate “meaningful and conclusive talks” for a comprehensive settlement, subject to agreement by Washington and Tehran.

His statement comes as the war, involving U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran and retaliatory attacks, entered its fourth week.Trump said on Monday that U.S. officials had engaged in “very good and productive” discussions with Iran over a “complete and total resolution of hostilities in the Middle East.”

He added that talks began on Sunday and continued into Monday, involving Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and adviser Jared Kushner.

Iranian parliament speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf rejected the U.S. account, saying no talks had taken place and describing reports of negotiations as “fake news,” according to Iranian state-linked statements and sources familiar with the matter.

The divergence underscores the opacity surrounding diplomatic efforts as fighting continues across the region.

The United States and Israel launched strikes on Iran on February 28, citing a lack of progress in negotiations over Tehran’s nuclear programme. Mediator Oman had previously indicated that significant advances had been made in earlier discussions.

Since the strikes, Iran has responded with missile attacks and expanded its actions beyond Israeli territory, targeting countries hosting U.S. bases and striking Gulf energy infrastructure.

The conflict has disrupted global energy markets, with Iran effectively closing the Strait of Hormuz, a critical maritime route through which roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas supplies transit.

The escalation has heightened concerns over supply stability and increased geopolitical risk across the Middle East, prompting renewed international calls for de-escalation through diplomatic channels.

In a social media post, Trump said the United States would “hit and obliterate” Iranian power infrastructure if the strait was not “fully open, without threat” within the deadline, broadening the potential scope of U.S. military action to include civilian-linked facilities.

The Strait of Hormuz is a critical maritime corridor through which roughly a fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas flows. Ongoing threats and disruptions have deterred shipping traffic, with the near-blockade triggering a surge in European gas prices of up to 35% last week.Energy markets have remained volatile as the risk to Gulf infrastructure intensifies.

The situation worsened after Iran responded to an Israeli strike on one of its major gas fields by targeting Ras Laffan Industrial City in Qatar, a key hub processing a significant share of the world’s liquefied natural gas. Damage from the strike is expected to take years to repair, according to reports.

Iran warns of broader retaliationIran’s Khatam al-Anbiya military headquarters said on Sunday that any U.S. attack on its fuel and energy infrastructure would prompt retaliatory strikes on American energy, information technology and desalination assets across the region.

The exchange of threats underscores a widening confrontation that increasingly targets economic and civilian-linked infrastructure, raising the stakes for regional stability and global supply chains.Israeli officials said Iran had fired long-range missiles for the first time since hostilities intensified on February 28, expanding the potential reach of the conflict.

According to Israeli military chief Eyal Zamir, Iran launched two ballistic missiles with a range of about 4,000 km at the Diego Garcia base in the Indian Ocean.Zamir said the missiles’ range extended beyond the Middle East, placing European capitals within potential reach.

A source at Britain’s defense ministry said the attack occurred before London granted specific authorization on Friday for the United States to use British bases for strikes on Iranian missile sites.

The developments mark a significant expansion in both the geographic scope and strategic targets of the conflict, with direct implications for international energy flows and military alignments.

In comments shared in a video that resurfaced online, the minister said “anyone here who is more loyal to Iran than to Bahrain should rely on Allah and leave,” adding that those who prioritise ties to Iran should “leave and settle down” there. The remarks come as Bahrain and neighbouring Gulf countries face continued missile and drone attacks from Iran in a conflict that escalated following tensions with the United States on Feb. 28.

Iran has launched strikes not only on Israel but also on multiple Gulf states, including the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, according to official statements and regional reporting. The attacks have targeted both military and civilian infrastructure across the region. Bahrain has reported damage to sites including areas near the U.S. Fifth Fleet headquarters in Manama, underscoring the proximity of strategic assets to the conflict.

The United Arab Emirates has also reported sustained strikes, with its defence ministry citing hundreds of missiles and drones launched since late February. The widening scope of the conflict has raised concerns among Gulf governments about both external threats and internal vulnerabilities.

The minister’s remarks follow heightened concern among Gulf authorities over domestic security and alleged links between Iran and networks operating within the region. Regional security reporting has pointed to concerns about covert cells providing intelligence or operational support, including relaying coordinates or documenting strike locations.

Bahraini authorities have long accused Iran of backing militant groups and fomenting unrest in the kingdom. The issue of national loyalty has remained a sensitive topic in Bahrain, particularly during periods of heightened regional tension.

Bahrain has experienced episodes of unrest in the past, and officials have repeatedly emphasised national unity during times of geopolitical strain. Since the outbreak of hostilities, Gulf states have tightened security measures and reinforced public messaging as they respond to the expanding conflict, which has disrupted energy flows and heightened geopolitical risks across the region.