AI provides a structural advantage to those in power by automating government systems. This allows leaders to bypass the traditional unwieldiness of human bureaucracy, making it trivial for an executive to change AI parameters and instantly exert their will across all levels of government, thereby concentrating power.
Related Insights
If AGI is concentrated in a few US companies, other nations could lose their economic sovereignty. When American AGI can produce goods far cheaper than local human labor, economies like the UK's could collapse. They would become economically dependent "client states," reliant on American technology for almost all production, with wealth accruing to Silicon Valley.
The justification for accelerating AI development to beat China is logically flawed. It assumes the victor wields a controllable tool. In reality, both nations are racing to build the same uncontrollable AI, making the race itself, not the competitor, the primary existential threat.
AI is not solely a tool for the powerful; it can also level the playing field. Grassroots political campaigns and labor organizers can use AI to access capabilities—like personalized mass communication and safety reporting apps—that were previously only affordable for well-funded, established entities.
A ban on superintelligence is self-defeating because enforcement would require a sanctioned, global government body to build the very technology it prohibits in order to "prove it's safe." This paradoxically creates a state-controlled monopoly on the most powerful technology ever conceived, posing a greater risk than a competitive landscape.
Top AI leaders are motivated by a competitive, ego-driven desire to create a god-like intelligence, believing it grants them ultimate power and a form of transcendence. This 'winner-takes-all' mindset leads them to rationalize immense risks to humanity, framing it as an inevitable, thrilling endeavor.
AI's integration into democracy isn't happening through top-down mandates but via individual actors like city councilors and judges. They can use AI tools for tasks like drafting bills or interpreting laws without seeking permission, leading to rapid, unregulated adoption in areas with low public visibility.
AI favors incumbents more than startups. While everyone builds on similar models, true network effects come from proprietary data and consumer distribution, both of which incumbents own. Startups are left with narrow problems, but high-quality incumbents are moving fast enough to capture these opportunities.
GSB professors warn that professionals who merely use AI as a black box—passing queries and returning outputs—risk minimizing their own role. To remain valuable, leaders must understand the underlying models and assumptions to properly evaluate AI-generated solutions and maintain control of the decision-making process.
For the first time, a disruptive technology's most advanced capabilities are available to the public from day one via consumer apps. An individual with a smartphone has access to the same state-of-the-art AI as a top VC or Fortune 500 CEO, making it the most democratic technology in history.
The current market boom, largely driven by AI enthusiasm, provides critical political cover for the Trump administration. An AI market downturn would severely weaken his political standing. This creates an incentive for the administration to take extraordinary measures, like using government funds to backstop private AI companies, to prevent a collapse.
