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.

There is no point of AI dominance where a nation becomes immune to safety risks. For both the U.S. and China, every advance in model capability inherently increases national vulnerability to misuse, accidents, or attacks, linking the two concepts inextricably.

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 debate pitting AI safety against AI opportunity presents a false choice. Historical parallels, like the railroad industry, show that safety regulations (e.g., standardized tracks, air brakes) were essential for enabling greater speed, reliability, and economic potential. Trustworthy AI will unlock greater opportunity.

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.

Established Chinese tech giants like Alibaba and Tencent are more focused on AI safety than their startup counterparts. This is attributed to having more to lose, more mature institutional cultures, and a stronger desire to stay in the government's good graces, while startups primarily race to catch up.

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.

The view that safety measures hinder AI performance is a false dichotomy. A model's economic usefulness and profitability are directly tied to its controllability and predictability, making safety and alignment core product features rather than constraints.

Mindful of historical Luddite backlashes, both the Chinese government and AI entrepreneurs adopt a cautious, collaborative approach. Regulations, like those for AI companions, are drafted and then softened after industry feedback, balancing innovation with the government's top priority: social stability.