While currently promoting open-source AI, the Chinese Communist Party will inevitably lock down powerful models once they are capable of sophisticated cyber operations. The risk of domestic groups, like Tibetan separatists, using these tools to challenge state control like the Great Firewall is a threat the CCP will not tolerate.

Unlike the US's public-private debate over Anthropic's powerful AI model, China's equivalent will involve a more consolidated power dynamic. A closely-held private company will face a much more aggressive government, creating a different and potentially more dramatic outcome for AI control.

A stark cultural divide in AI perception gives China a strategic edge. With 84% of its populace excited about AI as a practical tool, it fosters rapid adoption. This contrasts sharply with the US, where fear and 'doom trolling' are prevalent, potentially slowing innovation and integration.

China's seemingly contradictory AI policy—promoting both openness and strict control—stems from its view of AI as a "normal technology" akin to the internet. Unlike some in the West who see it as an existential risk, Beijing sees a technology that should be diffused as widely as possible for economic gain, while managing its risks with conventional tools like robust cybersecurity.

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.

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.

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.

Chinese citizens overwhelmingly view AI as a practical tool for work, entertainment, or medical advice. This contrasts with the US, where public discourse is dominated by existential fears of AGI, "machine gods," and extinction scenarios, leading to much higher rates of public apprehension.