The common Western argument that regulating AI is futile because "China will never slow down" is a misconception. China's government and research community actively engage with AI safety, even implementing policies that have slowed down their own companies in the name of safety.

Top Chinese officials use the metaphor "if the braking system isn't under control, you can't really step on the accelerator with confidence." This reflects a core belief that robust safety measures enable, rather than hinder, the aggressive development and deployment of powerful AI systems, viewing the two as synergistic.

China's binding regulations mean companies focus safety efforts on the 31 specific risks defined by the government. This compliance-driven approach can leave them less prepared for emergent risks like CBRN or loss of control, as resources are directed toward meeting existing legal requirements rather than proactive, voluntary measures.

In contrast to the 'AI psychosis' of some US labs, Baidu’s CFO frames AI alignment as a technical challenge of robustness and data sanity. He suggests these issues are being efficiently addressed by a 'very collegial' global open-source community, indicating a more pragmatic and less alarmist approach to AI risk management.

In China, academics have significant influence on policymaking, partly due to a cultural tradition that highly values scholars. Experts deeply concerned about existential AI risks have briefed the highest levels of government, suggesting that policy may be less susceptible to capture by commercial tech interests compared to the West.

In the high-stakes race for AGI, nations and companies view safety protocols as a hindrance. Slowing down for safety could mean losing the race to a competitor like China, reframing caution as a luxury rather than a necessity in this competitive landscape.

Founders of top Chinese AI labs like DeepSeek and Kimi intentionally cultivate cultures focused on the long-term mission of achieving AGI over immediate commercialization. This focus on "core science" helps unite teams and attract talent, countering stereotypes of pure commercial focus.

A US-style "Project Glasswing" for AI safety is unlikely in China because its major tech firms (Alibaba, Tencent, ByteDance) are fierce rivals. Unlike in the US, where a lab could partner with a company like Microsoft, Chinese conglomerates would refuse to hand over proprietary model technology to direct competitors, whom they actively poach from and have long-standing rivalries with.

A guiding philosophy in China's AI ecosystem is the "45-degree line," a concept where safety measures and standards should rise in direct proportion to AI capabilities. This pragmatic approach avoids over-investing in safety for non-existent capabilities while ensuring safeguards keep pace with advancements.