(Prefaced with the understanding that your comment is to some extent devil’s advocating and this response may be too)
both the US and Chinese governments have the potential to step in when corporations in their country get too powerful
What is ‘step in’? I think when people are describing things in aggregated national terms without nuance, they’re implicitly imagining govts either already directing, or soon/inevitably appropriating and directing (perhaps to aggressive national interest plays). But govts could just as readily regulate and provide guidance on underprovisioned dimensions (like safety and existential risk mitigation). Or they could in fact be powerless, or remain basically passive until too late, or… (all live possibilities to me).
In these alternative cases, the kind of language and thinking I’m highlighting in the post seems like a sort of nonsense to me—like it doesn’t really parse unless you tacitly assume some foregone conclusions.
(Prefaced with the understanding that your comment is to some extent devil’s advocating and this response may be too)
What is ‘step in’? I think when people are describing things in aggregated national terms without nuance, they’re implicitly imagining govts either already directing, or soon/inevitably appropriating and directing (perhaps to aggressive national interest plays). But govts could just as readily regulate and provide guidance on underprovisioned dimensions (like safety and existential risk mitigation). Or they could in fact be powerless, or remain basically passive until too late, or… (all live possibilities to me).
In these alternative cases, the kind of language and thinking I’m highlighting in the post seems like a sort of nonsense to me—like it doesn’t really parse unless you tacitly assume some foregone conclusions.