Where were the calls to for MSFT to be regulated by an "international governance body" when MSFT office became the dominant player in that market? Yet today the AI bros want to "pause the frontier" in the name of safety. For me this isn't about being upset about the neutering of LLMs (or whatever rudimentary tech we have today that is larping as AI) but it's a much broader issue of tech bro statists who believe they have the divine right to determine who can use what tool. Basically, we are back to the tug of war between centralized and decentralized market players; where the former use regulatory capture to decapitate their competitors.

Think about it, in what world does it make sense for the CEO of any thriving and successful company to demand the state intervene in their industry to make sure everyone is safe? Isn't that the ceo's job to make sure that nothing dangerous gets built or released? Unless of course, the companies in question aren't thriving and are up to their eyeballs in debt, while having destroyed over $200 trillion of capital and are looking for a bailout from the state? Or could it be that all this doomerism is part of the narrative building as Anthropic and OpenAI head for IPO? Wouldn't the markets just love the "we are so good that we are dangerous" narrative? Regardless of whatever it is, Amodei, Musk and Altman (along with their supporters) are enemies of human progress.