Why do you think there is a discrepancy between the stated AI goals for Chinese policymakers and tech leaders? Could this be due to a difference in incentives (e.g., Chinese policymakers have an incentive to downplay the risk of AGI because of the instability it would add to already unstable times, while tech leaders have an incentive to treat AGI as feasible in order to attract public and private investment)?
This is an interesting question. I do think the policymakers are more focused on trying to deliver benefits to the "real economy" while some of the tech leaders may want to sell more of a story to the public and investors.
Interesting piece. A key tactic worth noting... by framing China as the villain in the AI race, Western labs can manufacture urgency and existential anxiety, emotions that ultimately pressure policymakers into providing far greater support for the pursuit of AGI.
Going headlong for AGI, even if it never arrives, may also turn out to be the most effective way to develop AI as a GPT along the way. The push for AGI requires and justifies the huge capital investments which are likely to improve AI quickly.
The Chinese approach could be far too cautious, which is not unexpected in a state-driven economy which doesn’t benefit from the competitive pressures driving U.S. hyperscalers.
Could be Chinese leaders don't hold the same eschatological belief in AGI as its Western boosters do. Could be they don't think it's proper for a small group of people to chose in private that, whether AGI is a positive change for society of a negative one, they want to make it happen.
Why do you think there is a discrepancy between the stated AI goals for Chinese policymakers and tech leaders? Could this be due to a difference in incentives (e.g., Chinese policymakers have an incentive to downplay the risk of AGI because of the instability it would add to already unstable times, while tech leaders have an incentive to treat AGI as feasible in order to attract public and private investment)?
This is an interesting question. I do think the policymakers are more focused on trying to deliver benefits to the "real economy" while some of the tech leaders may want to sell more of a story to the public and investors.
This isn’t China “not caring” about AGI.
It’s China treating AI as a capability substrate, not a legitimacy rupture.
The US obsesses over who gets there first.
China optimizes for who can use it everywhere.
I agree. Well put.
Interesting piece. A key tactic worth noting... by framing China as the villain in the AI race, Western labs can manufacture urgency and existential anxiety, emotions that ultimately pressure policymakers into providing far greater support for the pursuit of AGI.
Going headlong for AGI, even if it never arrives, may also turn out to be the most effective way to develop AI as a GPT along the way. The push for AGI requires and justifies the huge capital investments which are likely to improve AI quickly.
The Chinese approach could be far too cautious, which is not unexpected in a state-driven economy which doesn’t benefit from the competitive pressures driving U.S. hyperscalers.
US tech mafia wants AGI for wrong reasons
to tokenize and cut employment
Could be Chinese leaders don't hold the same eschatological belief in AGI as its Western boosters do. Could be they don't think it's proper for a small group of people to chose in private that, whether AGI is a positive change for society of a negative one, they want to make it happen.