Huge Bifurcation in American AI War 1/ True current frontier labs like Open and Anthropic. Google is not frontier. These labs currently have the best models but are arguing for max regulatory capture and to basically control the pace of intelligence. Safety is clearly used to propagate a reg cap agenda. Their models are truly insanely good and the final jump in intelligence can create massive amounts in economic benefit, its an exponential style return not linear. They should also own a % of the technologies their models create as per token billing makes no sense. There is zero shot these companies slow down on training (maybe slow down what they release) given China will not slow down and if we lose AGI, we lose everything. Model commoditization and chinese AI labs doing actually cool inventive stuff makes their business model a lot harder. 2/ The open source and sovereign first AI companies like Meta (open models and muse), Palantir (own your intelligence stack), Microsoft (Satya bullish open source and serving this to enterprise) and soon Google since they lost the frontier race and will roll out massive open source support imo. Nvidia included. These companies do not offer frontier models they offer 90% as good for 1/10 the cost but you can actually own your AI stack as a core business asset instead of being IP farmed. They’re not using doomerism as reg capture. They benefit from Chinese open source models and a lot of value is returned to enterprises and people. It’s a bet models commoditize and we get millions of not specific models (my old thesis) but AI architectures around models (data, memory, interactions, internal apps etc) you can point at any model i.e. Nous Research Hermes agent for enterprise is the best example of this thesis. Actually it may be more than 90% as good since its a custom offering for your business at a way lower price point and you can sell the IP later on. Closed vs Open Source Safety vs Accelerationism Reg capture vs market economy This dynamic has many names Who wins?