Big AI sets out its terms for regulatory capture

Post by superxpro12 » Mon, Sep 14, 2026, 3:39 PM UTC

rglover wrote: post #28

toasty228 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have such a weird and outdated view of China, it's almost comical. It's like America's answer to everything bad coming to them is protectionism. They still think China is a third world country with a bunch of factories and polluting industries not able to do anything else other than manufacturing products for foreign companies

China played the smart long game and took advantage of America's ignorance and short-sighted thinking. They already "won" in the sense that they outmaneuvered the U.S. because they relied on flaws in human nature (specifically, greed). Their moves around AI are just more of the same clever behavior. I don't agree with all of their means for getting here, but to accomplish what they have in ~30 or so years [1] should…

Post by superxpro12 » Mon, Sep 14, 2026, 3:40 PM UTC

ultrarunner wrote: post #42

mcshicks wrote: post #39

I think there is an obvious example in the FAA of a successful safety regulation of another potentially dangerous technology industry. A similar agency would seem to me like a logical starting point. I did some minor work a long time ago in commercial avionics software and while it was a very tedious process I did have confidence in it. Obviously a lot of things would have to be different but the basic structure of d…

And what has the FAA done to both costs and innovation?

Post by altcognito » Mon, Sep 14, 2026, 3:55 PM UTC

rglover wrote: post #47

altcognito wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China deliberately adopted western style market institutions. They joined the WTO. No, they aren't a fully westernized market, but they are closer to a competitive marketplace than the state dictating all of what will or will not be built. I'm confused, what has America and the west lost the plot on? You would have preferred the west to exploit China more? This framing of a zero sum game is counterproductive.

> This framing of a zero sum game is counterproductive. I agree but that's not at all what I was getting at. Quite the opposite. The mistake America made, what made it vulnerable, was playing everything like a zero sum game. We're in the early days of that behavior coming to roost.

Post by LiquidSky » Mon, Sep 14, 2026, 4:06 PM UTC

mcshicks wrote: post #46

ultrarunner wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what has the FAA done to both costs and innovation?

I'm getting on a plane tomorrow. I think I would prefer a world with the FAA than one without it.

Post by cucumber3732842 » Mon, Sep 14, 2026, 4:26 PM UTC

superxpro12 wrote: post #51

rglover wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China played the smart long game and took advantage of America's ignorance and short-sighted thinking. They already "won" in the sense that they outmaneuvered the U.S. because they relied on flaws in human nature (specifically, greed). Their moves around AI are just more of the same clever behavior. I don't agree with all of their means for getting here, but to accomplish what they have in ~30 or so years [1] should…

its the natural conclusion of raw unregulated capitalism. Without guiderails, we offshored all production (because it was cheaper), and we suffered a complete loss of manufacturing workforce. Now that Trump has gone full protectionist, we have nothing with which to manufacture from. It's beautifully ironic in a way, in that our greed will be our downfall. Of course china isnt innocent in all of this. Their 996 work c…