Twitxy Saved

Scott Singer

Verified account This account is verified. Learn more

@Scott_R_Singer

frontier AI, China, and California @CarnegieEndow
1.1K Following 2.5K Followers 1.5K Posts

Latest posts 5

Pinned post

Scott Singer Verified account @Scott_R_Singer
In August, the Chinese humanoid robot Tiangong Ultra bested Usain Bolt's 100 meter record. These robots still have serious (though sometimes pretty funny) flaws; this one crashed into a wall.

But make no mistake. As Pavlo Zvenyhorodskyi and I write in @ForeignAffairs, AI-powered robotics are going to change the physical world. China is investing substantially in these robots while the U.S. lags behind.

In the U.S., the top frontier AI companies are betting that they'll be able to automate just about everything humans can do on a computer in a few years. But that leaves a lot: everything that requires real-world interaction. Some people assume that rapid advances in software will easily diffuse into physical spaces. That's a big assumption to make given how important this technology might be.

China has invested in AI-powered robotics for several domestic reasons, including creating robotic caretakers. But robotics could just as well become a source of geopolitical advantage in supply chains and in the military. Many robotics companies in China are struggling to make a profit, but there's serious progress in the underlying technology. There significant parallels to China's playbook in EVs and solar.

Clearly, the U.S. needs to rapidly build up its robotics industry. But doing so will require a tough balancing act: decoupling is impractical given the deeply integrated nature of the supply chain. One of the key answers will involve working with allies and partners in Europe and Asia who have advantages in areas like industrial robotics as well as novel data sources, such as Ukraine's battlefield data.
1 replies 5 reposts 26 likes 3.2K views View on X
Scott Singer Verified account @Scott_R_Singer
Absolutely right, and to AI specifically, the public isn't going to tolerate substantial job loss, the prospect of getting decimated by an AI-enabled bioweapon, or whatever else because of some vague notion of "China." It just doesn't land when the cost of living is high and people have families they want to take care of. People need to feel the benefits a lot more than they do now for there to be a robust techno-accelerationist camp (and FWIW I think it is good for the discourse for there to be one! But they need to make their argument much more accessible to a public that is afraid and angry at the tech.)
Ryan Hass Verified account @ryanl_hass 3d
1/ The US midterm election outcome wasn't about China, but there is a lesson in it for the forthcoming China policy debate in 2028. When the US public is not brought in or bought in to major foreign policy actions, it will not tolerate being told to bear costs for them. (🧵)
View quoted post on X
0 replies 3 reposts 17 likes 1.1K views View on X
Scott Singer Verified account @Scott_R_Singer
Come work with us!

Our China AI team is hiring a Program Assistant. The ideal candidate will help form the administrative and operational backbone of our growing research and convening work. If you're looking to break into the foreign policy field, begin a career in DC, or make an impact on U.S.-China relations and AI, this could be the role for you! @mattsheehan88 and I and our growing team look forward to hearing from you.

Link below:
3 replies 11 reposts 49 likes 9.1K views View on X
Scott Singer Verified account @Scott_R_Singer
China is a generally techno-optimist country, but even for the CCP, that techno-optimism has limits. For example, virtual AI companions are a problem if you're worried about a low birth rate and want your 20 and 30-year-olds (the generations after that) to reproduce. AI turbo-charging the economy is all well and good until SOEs become pressed to fire workers whose jobs have been automated (not there yet but may soon get there). AI offers new opportunities for education until your top mathematicians and software engineers struggle to find work (similar story). Right now, the party line is that it can reap the benefits and minimize the risks –– not so dissimilar from what we see in the U.S. But with the technology moving so quickly, it might cause really challenging short-term disruption (not uniquely so), even if there are substantial long-term benefits.

Good to chat about this stuff and more with @nytimes