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.

The intensity of Chinese AI regulation fluctuates with the government's confidence in its domestic industry. When feeling behind (post-ChatGPT), they eased up to foster innovation. After recent successes, they feel more secure and may re-assert stricter, more hands-on control.

Contrary to fears that U.S. regulation cedes ground to China, the CCP has strong self-interested reasons to regulate AI. It is highly concerned with internal stability and control, cracking down on AI-driven social disruption and the risk of domestic cyberattacks, independent of Western policy.

The argument that the U.S. must race to build superintelligence before China is flawed. The Chinese Communist Party's primary goal is control. An uncontrollable AI poses a direct existential threat to their power, making them more likely to heavily regulate or halt its development rather than recklessly pursue it.

Contrary to the argument that regulation stifles innovation, China has implemented extensive AI regulations over the past four years. During this same period, its AI technology has made significant inroads, challenging the notion that a laissez-faire approach is essential for competitiveness.

While the U.S. stalls on AI legislation, China is actively regulating it. This has led to significantly higher public trust and adoption in China (87% trust vs. 32% in the US), creating a more stable environment for AI development and deployment.

The Chinese government perceives less risk from releasing open-weight models because it has a demonstrated ability to censor and control its domestic internet. They believe that if a model proves dangerous, they can effectively scrub it from circulation and track down illicit use, a capacity Western governments lack.

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.