The Atomic Bomb's Creators Couldn't Control Its Use

Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei's constant recommendation of "The Making of the Atomic Bomb" book highlights parallels between the development of nuclear weapons and advanced AI.

Mar. 3, 2026 at 4:25pm

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

The 1986 Pulitzer Prize-winning book "The Making of the Atomic Bomb" by Richard Rhodes chronicles how the scientists who developed the atomic bomb were unable to control how it would ultimately be used. This mirrors the concerns raised by Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei about the potential misuse of advanced AI technology that his company is helping to create.

Why it matters

The book's themes of scientific discovery leading to unintended and uncontrollable consequences are highly relevant today as the rapid advancement of artificial intelligence raises similar ethical dilemmas. Just as the atomic bomb's creators were unable to dictate its use, AI developers may struggle to govern how their technologies are ultimately deployed.

The details

The book details how physicists like Leo Szilard and Niels Bohr tried unsuccessfully to place restrictions on the use of the atomic bomb, only to have their efforts thwarted by military and political leaders. Amodei has drawn parallels between this dynamic and the challenges AI companies face in trying to responsibly develop powerful technologies that could be misused by others.

  • The Making of the Atomic Bomb was published in 1986.
  • Amodei has frequently recommended the book on the Ezra Klein Show, in interviews, and to Anthropic employees.
  • Vox's Dylan Matthews visited Anthropic's San Francisco offices in 2026 and observed copies of the book on coffee tables and an employee with an Oppenheimer sticker on their laptop.

The players

Richard Rhodes

The Pulitzer Prize-winning author of The Making of the Atomic Bomb, a comprehensive history of the development of nuclear weapons.

Dario Amodei

The CEO of Anthropic, an artificial intelligence research company, who frequently recommends The Making of the Atomic Bomb to his employees and in public interviews.

Leo Szilard

A Hungarian-born theoretical physicist who first conceived of how a nuclear chain reaction could work and drafted the letter that Einstein signed urging President Roosevelt to pursue the atomic bomb, but later argued against the strict compartmentalization of the Manhattan Project.

Niels Bohr

A Danish Nobel laureate physicist whose model of the atom changed physics, and who argued the atomic bomb's threat contained the promise of openness and transparency, but was rebuffed by President Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill.

Robert Oppenheimer

The physicist who led the Manhattan Project and learned that he could either build the atomic bomb or try to govern its use, but not do both.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“There is no way of telling beforehand what man is likely to discover and invent a new method which will make the old methods obsolete.”

— Leo Szilard, Physicist

“The Manhattan (Project) District '…bore no relation to the industrial or social life of our country; it was a separate state, with its own airplanes and its own factories and its thousands of secrets. It had a peculiar sovereignty, one that could bring about the end, peacefully or violently, of all other sovereignties.'”

— Herbert S. Marks, First General Counsel of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission

What’s next

As advanced AI systems continue to rapidly develop, policymakers and technology leaders will need to grapple with how to responsibly govern these powerful new tools and prevent their misuse, just as the creators of the atomic bomb struggled to control the consequences of their scientific breakthroughs.

The takeaway

The parallels between the development of nuclear weapons and the rise of transformative AI highlight the enduring challenge of scientific innovation outpacing society's ability to manage its impacts. The cautionary tale of the atomic bomb's creation shows how even brilliant minds can fail to anticipate or control the far-reaching implications of their work.