We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Comment by Dario Amodei
CEO at Anthropic
This means that in 2026-2027 we could end up in one of two starkly different worlds. In the US, multiple companies will definitely have the required millions of chips (at the cost of tens of billions of dollars). The question is whether China will also be able to get millions of chips. [...] * If China can’t get millions of chips, we’ll (at least temporarily) live in a unipolar world, where only the US and its allies have these models. It’s unclear whether the unipolar world will last, but there’s at least the possibility that, because AI systems can eventually help make even smarter AI systems, a temporary lead could be parlayed into a durable advantage. Thus, in this world, the US and its allies might take a commanding and long-lasting lead on the global stage. * Well-enforced export controls are the only thing that can prevent China from getting millions of chips, and are therefore the most important determinant of whether we end up in a unipolar or bipolar world. [...] Given my focus on export controls and US national security, I want to be clear on one thing. I don’t see DeepSeek themselves as adversaries and the point isn’t to target them in particular. [...] But they’re beholden to an authoritarian government that has committed human rights violations, has behaved aggressively on the world stage, and will be far more unfettered in these actions if they’re able to match the US in AI. Export controls are one of our most powerful tools for preventing this, and the idea that the technology getting more powerful, having more bang for the buck, is a reason to lift our export controls makes no sense at all.AI Verified source (Jan 2025)
Policy proposals and claims
votes For
Statement relation comments
AI Verified
Relevant: the quote is explicitly part of the author’s argument for AI-chip export controls to China, and the source frames those controls as protecting “the US and its allies” and keeping democratic nations ahead. That makes support for democracies coordinating such controls substantially more likely than opposition or abstention, even though the quote does not literally say “coordinate.” ([darioamodei.com](https://darioamodei.com/post/on-deepseek-and-export-controls))
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 15d ago
Vote answer comments
AI Verified
He is clearly pro–export controls on AI chips to China: he says export controls serve "a vital purpose: keeping democratic nations at the forefront of AI development," and that "well-enforced export controls are the only thing" that can stop China from getting millions of chips. The statement’s "coordinate" wording is an inference rather than verbatim, but his repeated framing in terms of "the US and its allies" and "democratic nations" strongly implies support for democracies acting together on such controls. ([darioamodei.com](https://darioamodei.com/post/on-deepseek-and-export-controls))
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 15d ago
Quote authenticity verification history
Report thisQuote authenticity comments
AI Verified
The source URL is fetchable and shows a January 2025 essay, On DeepSeek and Export Controls, credited to Dario Amodei. The quoted language appears verbatim in the article at lines 49-53 and 60-61; the [...] sections are faithful omissions of intervening text, not alterations. ([darioamodei.com](https://darioamodei.com/post/on-deepseek-and-export-controls))
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 15d ago
replying to Dario Amodei