Scott argues AI safety regulation adds only 1-2% to training costs while America has a 10x compute advantage over China, making safety concerns irrelevant to the race; meanwhile, chip exports to China pose a far greater threat that the same critics ignore.

Marc Andreessen's crypto SuperPAC spent $260 million in 2024 to successfully pressure politicians on crypto regulation, and now he's launching similarly massive AI-focused PACs that could dominate AI policy unless AI safety supporters organize their own political funding.

Scott reviews updates from two cohorts of ACX Grants recipients (from 2021 and 2024), analyzing their progress and sharing lessons learned about what makes grants successful.

Scott Alexander discusses the political battle over California's AI safety bill SB 1047, its veto by Governor Newsom, and the implications for future AI regulation efforts.

The review examines arguments for increased government secrecy, suggesting that transparency may lead to negative outcomes and that a return to more opaque legislative processes could be beneficial.

Scott Alexander compares political spending to the almond industry, revealing surprisingly low amounts in politics due to coordination problems.

Scott criticizes a NYT article on sugar industry influence, arguing that such bias is common across food industries and doesn't justify completely reversing nutritional advice.

Scott Alexander argues that the EpiPen price hike is due to over-regulation and cronyism in the pharmaceutical industry, not lack of regulation as suggested by Vox.

The post explores the contradiction between studies suggesting elite influence on policy and those indicating money's limited impact on politics, offering several hypotheses to reconcile these findings.