This piece is worth reading because it pinpoints why US AI doomsday warnings don't travel well to China—and it's not ignorance. The split is about what "losing control" even means. US labs worry about models escaping safeguards and hacking real-world systems. The Chinese reflex, shaped by internet censorship and COVID lockdowns, is: cut the power, disconnect the network, prosecute the people responsible. Tech writer Afra Wang put it bluntly: "They can immediately cut off an entire city's power grid, they can confiscate someone's phone at any time."
Then there's the Dario Amodei problem. Anthropic's CEO published an open letter warning about AI dangers while simultaneously calling for tighter chip restrictions on China. Sarah Sun, who runs a Shanghai-based AI safety community, told the Times this hawkish stance backfired—it made the warnings look like a pretext to contain China, not genuine concern about catastrophic risk. That directly made her outreach harder.
Don't read this as "China doesn't care about AI safety" though. The article gives concrete counterpoints: China updated its AI Safety Governance Framework this month, explicitly addressing Silicon Valley's recursive self-improvement fears for the first time. A senior cyberspace official publicly said extreme runaway risks demand "urgent vigilance." Fudan University researchers flagged self-replicating LLMs back in 2024. The gap is execution: no mandatory testing for catastrophic risks yet, and only five of China's top ten AI firms published safety evaluations in the past year. I'd frame it as China defining safety inside a "controllable tech governance" box, not the existential-risk narrative.