[deepsquirrelnet]

This is my own take, directly related to this that I posted a little while back. The one thing that I think the article missed is the geopolitical angle they’re also working:

* We need to completely deregulate these US companies so China doesn't win and take us over

* We need to heavily regulate anybody who is not following the rules that make us the de-facto winner

* This is so powerful it will take all the jobs (and therefore if you lead a company that isn't using AI, you will soon be obsolete)

* If you don't use AI, you will not be able to function in a future job

* We need to lineup an excuse to call our friends in government and turn off the open source spigot when the time is right

They have chosen fear as a motivator, and it is clearly working very well. It's easier to use fear now, while it's new and then flip the narrative once people are more familiar with it than to go the other direction. Companies are not just telling a story to hype their product, but why they alone are the ones that should be entrusted to build it.

[mofeien]

"The race to build smarter-than-human AI is a race with no winners."

And specifically about the point on China, several people in power in China have also expressed the need to regulate AI and put international structures of governance in place to make sure it will benefit mankind:

https://nowinners.ai/#s5-china

[peyton]

I’ll buy it when they stop lying in the history section of their UN bioweapons self-certification thing. They can do that any time.

[lbrito]

>deregulation

Peter Thiel literally gave a lecture on the Antichrist* saying basically that regulation is satanic https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/17/world/europe/peter-thiel-...

* He's the best person in the world for this lecture - the only one that can claim first-person knowledge on the subject!

[mghackerlady]

he's a nutjob, I don't know why anyone would listen to what he has to say outside of fear

[metalliqaz]

money talks

[wise0wl]

The outcome of this is, in my opinion, the United States Government classifying and regulating LLMs as something akin to how the ATF classifies weapons, ie. requiring a license to operate an LLM (hosting), with different classifications and determinations on the relative "power" of a particular model and framework, and outright banning most open-source models, like how DIY machine guns or suppressors are banned.

Think of a standard for classifying and regulating the self-hosting of open-source models similar to how an FFL works. You can do it, but you must have all your paperwork lined up, with background checks, a valid business license, and if you forget to dot an "i" or cross a "t" the Cyber version of the ATF shows up and shoots your fucking dog.

[gip]

> We need to heavily regulate anybody who is not following the rules that make us the de-facto winner

How about building a multipolar world where different parts of the world (US/China/India/EU/Africa,..) get to build sovereign tech and have their own winners?

[netcan]

Yeah...

This thread and article have made me realize that a lot of different incentives exist to talk up the apocalypse.

It even neutralizes the Eliezers and their apocalypse mongering.

[lofaszvanitt]

Which trillion company is regulated in the US?

[ambicapter]

The tech broligarchs learned from their algorithms that fear sells whatever they want, and they carried that lesson into their "thought leadership".