Wait wut
An alert:View quoted post on X
@JensenHuang is human. And he is an incredible human. Even incredible humans make mistakes.
He takes full responsibility as he should.
We should all support him and his family.
Onward.
Chris Griswold
@Chris_Griz
Policy Director @AmerCompass | Opinions my own but I'll share
1K Following 1.1K Followers 531 Posts
Latest posts 5
Essential reading from anyone who cares about American technological leadership, industrial strength, and national security, from @fiiiiiist and the team at @IFP.
Big new IFP report from @GeorgiaCAdamson, @KonstantinPilz, and me on the US-China AI competition.
We spent the last 6 months digging into how Chinese AI companies’ access to compute and distillation of American models translate into the current US-China capabilities gap.
The result is a 23k-word research report, including an interactive analytical model that visualizes changes in the US AI lead under different policy interventions.
Our findings:
1. The US AI lead over China is currently only around 6 months.
2. The US could roughly double this lead, to over a year, using authorities already available to the federal government.
3. On chips: China’s access to AI chips will roughly double over the next year, with chips housed in data centers overseas accounting for roughly half of China’s 2027 compute.
4. On distillation: the current ~16x US training compute advantage would normally yield a 13-month lead. But we estimate adversarial distillation halves this to around 6.5 months.
5. Increasing the lead would have some obvious benefits:
- Give the US broadly a greater cyberdefensive advantage against Chinese threat actors.
- Give US AI companies breathing room to spend more R&D resources on making their systems safer and more secure, without fear of being overtaken by less safety-conscious Chinese competitors.
6. Provide the US government more leverage in negotiations with China about the future of AI.
7. The two most important interventions are:
- For BIS: Create a new end-use control to restrict China’s remote access to training clusters abroad — China’s largest and fastest-growing source of frontier-scale compute.
- For DOJ/FTC: Create a narrow safe harbor to allow US companies to coordinate on countering Chinese adversarial distillation.
8. Both interventions (and all the others we discuss in the report) are things the federal government could do today.
9. To estimate the effects of each policy intervention, we model the US lead as a function of its compute advantage over China and China’s ability to adversarially distill the capabilities of the US frontier.
10. The model makes many simplifying assumptions, but provides a useful way to assess and rank the impact of different policy interventions at a high level.
Read the full report here: ifp.org/how-to-increas…View quoted post on X
Unbelievable piece from the undefeated @AmberLappOH. Read at your peril.
mag.commonplace.org/p/an-american-…
mag.commonplace.org/p/an-american-…
mag.commonplace.org An American City What Springfield, Ohio, reveals about immigration and the American Dream. AI is “above all else a tool”. By definition, tools point to the human intelligence that crafted them and draw much of their ethical force from the intentions of the individuals that wield them…[like] misuse for selfish gain at the expense of others.” -Pope Leo XIV
The Blue Cross/Blue Shield Association says that AI is already driving *up* healthcare costs, as hospitals use the technology to find instances where they can bill more for the same level of care. bcbs.com/about-us/assoc…View quoted post on X
🎯 ✅
For many years, both restrictionists and many advocates of high-skilled immigration have recognized that the leverage employers have over visa holders is unfair to both the workers themselves and to American peers.View quoted post on X
If an employer can destroy your life, they can use that leverage to pay you less or otherwise mistreat you. The greater their leverage, the greater the incentive to hire workers who are (at least partially) "captive."
For years, workers on our primary nonimmigrant work visas have had 60 days to find a new job or depart after losing their job. That's not a ton of time. Most white-collar workers who get laid off spend longer than that looking for their next gig. But it is enough time for many to find a new job, meaning employers don't have *total* control. You can still figure something out if you, for example, resign because an employer is abusing or underpaying you.
But DHS is now proposing to eliminate even that 60-day grace period. Now, losing your job would mean immediately pulling your kids out of school, selling everything, and leaving. DHS is, in effect, putting employers entirely in charge of their employees' immigration status. This is a major step in the wrong direction, and one not asked for by either critics or supporters of these visa programs.
This is not going to improve prospects for American workers. Instead, it will further incentivize employers to hire visa holders over Americans.
