I haven’t seen much attention to this new China Daily editorial today. But it offers a revealing look at Beijing’s response to calls for an AI slowdown. It explicitly connects the calls from @DarioAmodei, @sama, and @elonmusk with Anthropic’s recent report alleging illicit distillation by Chinese companies—portraying them as parts of a coordinated effort to protect American firms from Chinese competition. Sam Altman says Trump and Xi could win the Nobel Peace Prize for an AI agreement: “I don’t think this is hard. This is like a one-page document.” But that's wrong. Upcoming AI talks will be "hard." And this editorial shows why. The headline really sums it all up: "'Dr Frankenstein' alarm cries of US' AI elites a self-serving bid for profit." A few key quotes from the China Daily: –"The [distillation] report, and the corporate 'alliance' that followed it, amounted in essence to a coordinated play — a response to Chinese competition and to the regulatory pressure coming from Washington. Its aims were threefold: to blunt China's AI advance, to win a favorable policy environment at home and to keep investors' enthusiasm for US AI alight." –"The distinction between a security measure and a competitive moat can become blurred when the companies building the moat are also allowed to define 'illicit distillation.'" –"The proposed coordination [to 'pace the frontier'] among the three companies sounds rather like a club whose membership rules have been drafted before the guest list is announced. A global AI-safety framework that excludes China is not quite global." The editorial doesn't rule out diplomacy but is trying to set the terms for upcoming talks. For more on China's response to "Pacing the Frontier":