Loading page…
Samuel King will discuss his virus-design research with James O’Donnell. The organizer draws a distinction between AI-proposed genetic blueprints and AI-generated life.
Listen to this story
MIT Technology Review’s subscriber-only Roundtables session will revisit Samuel King’s 2025 work, in which a generative model proposed genetic blueprints for microscopic viruses. The interview is scheduled for October 16, 2026, with AI reporter James O’Donnell; the announcement does not identify a new model or claim that the work created living organisms. For attendees, the key question is what the proposed designs demonstrate—and what evidence would be needed to call them AI-generated life.
The conversation starts at 10:30 a.m. PDT (1:30 p.m. EDT; 18:30 BST).
King is a bioengineering PhD candidate at Stanford University and the Arc Institute.
The agenda also includes King’s recognition as a MIT Technology Review Innovator Under 35 and new ways of seeing biology.
On Friday, October 16, 2026, MIT Technology Review will host a subscriber-only conversation about Samuel King’s AI-designed virus research, starting at 10:30 a.m. PDT. Subscribers can register through the official event page. AI reporter James O’Donnell will interview King about work that used a generative model to propose viral genetic blueprints.
The session is part of the publication’s Roundtables series, and access is restricted to MIT Technology Review subscribers. The organizer’s page includes a “Register now” invitation, making it the official starting point for attending. It does not list a separate direct viewing URL or a physical venue.
King is listed as a bioengineering PhD candidate at Stanford University and the Arc Institute. O’Donnell, MIT Technology Review’s senior AI reporter, will lead the interview. The announced agenda covers King’s research, his recognition as one of the publication’s Innovators Under 35, and new ways of seeing biology.
The research being discussed dates to 2025. According to the organizer’s description, King used a generative AI model to propose genetic blueprints for microscopic viruses. The event therefore looks back at that work; its confirmed format is a conversation with the researcher, rather than a presentation of a newly announced model.
It isn’t yet an example of AI-generated life, but that could be next.
MIT Technology Review, in its event announcement
The announcement frames the conversation around a large question: can AI design new life forms? But its description of King’s work is narrower. It says the model proposed genetic blueprints, while explicitly stopping short of calling the result AI-generated life. That distinction gives viewers a useful question to carry into the interview: what does the design demonstrate, and what would justify the stronger label?
Loading discussion...
Join the conversation
Explain where you would draw the line between a design and life.
Be the first to share a perspective or an experience.
Reader comments
Newest comments first. Replies stay oldest first.