China has a pre-existing regulatory body (CAC) and approval processes for AI models. While focused on content, this infrastructure can be extended to include cybersecurity tests, allowing for a more structured response to powerful new models compared to the US's reactive approach.
Confronted with a model capable of widespread hacking, China's government is expected to orchestrate a limited initial release. Access would be granted first to government bodies and critical infrastructure companies to identify and patch vulnerabilities before any public launch.
Chinese AI firms maintain close, ongoing communication with the Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC), including informal weekly meetings. This relationship ensures regulators are never caught by surprise, making it virtually impossible for a company to release a powerful new model without prior notice.
China champions open-source AI on the global stage to position itself as the open alternative to a restrictive U.S. This narrative is a valuable diplomatic asset, making a complete reversal on open-sourcing advanced models unlikely, even with rising security concerns.
An AI model capable of executing complex cyberattacks is equally capable of identifying and fixing those same vulnerabilities. A government like China's will likely first deploy the model for defense—patching critical systems—before any public or commercial release, thus mitigating risk.
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.
The most realistic path for US-China AI talks involves creating protocols to prevent models falling into the hands of terrorists or criminal groups. Cooperation on preventing state-level cyberattacks is unlikely, as both sides assume the other's intelligence agencies will use AI for espionage.
While the U.S. explores wealth redistribution schemes like UBI, China's initial approach makes it illegal for companies to fire employees whose roles are automated by AI. This forces firms to retain and find new tasks for workers, rather than shifting the burden to the state.
Top AI policy experts are leaving government and academia for high-paying roles at frontier AI companies. This mirrors the earlier 'brain drain' of ML researchers and risks a future where AI regulation is overwhelmingly shaped by corporate-employed experts with vested interests.