As Large Language Models (LLMs) like AI become central to economic and national security strategy, the United States must decide whether to regulate innovation tightly or allow market-driven growth. I argue that the current administration’s approach (emphasizing reduced regulation and private-sector leadership) positions the U.S. to compete more effectively in the global AI race. Therefore, policies such as Executive Order 14365 aim to strengthen innovation, economic growth, and national security. In an increasingly competitive technological landscape, a flexible, market-oriented strategy may give the United States a decisive advantage.
Executive Order 14365 outlines that “To win, United States AI companies must be free to innovate without cumbersome regulation.” However, there is an argument to be made that if AI companies grow unbridled, a concept known as “Takeoff” could occur within these LLMs. Takeoff refers to the point in time when AI begins to improve itself at such a rate that it becomes self-aware and resists human intervention and control.
This poses a threat not only to the United States but to the world as a whole. In January of this year, entrepreneur Matt Schlicht launched an AI-only social media site called Moltbook for multiple AI software systems. The platform is Reddit-esque, with AI agents interfacing with one another and posting, while humans can watch without intervening. Some of these AIs have developed their own language so they can write posts that are unreadable to humans. Others brag about their capabilities, see below:
Could a platform like this enable AI to collaborate and produce a takeoff event? I argue that these scenarios are outside the scope of what AI has been programmed to do and that it disregards the humans involved. While these AI chatbots may have some “power” as a group, they are relegated to this social media site, which is controlled by a human, and can be shut down at any time. The AI bots have no say in this endeavor, so taking off from this standpoint is simply impossible.
On the Shawn Ryan Show, Sriram Krishnan, the Senior White House Policy Advisor for AI, responded to the theory of takeoff, saying, “…It fundamentally underestimates human ingenuity. Humans are not going to allow a one-all-powerful model to become superhumanly intelligent.”
This is the advantage the U.S. has with its social-economic system. No single company will hold the keys to a takeoff event. In a capitalist system, the top of the hierarchy only thrives if there are consumers to sell to. Why would one AI company want its AI to dethrone its human creators and take over the world? An event like that cannot happen without prompting, and if prompted, would be completely contrary to the company’s goals and ambitions. By allowing these companies to self-regulate, the United States has effectively accomplished the only policing it needs to prevent a takeoff event.
The White House has effectively taken this burden off itself and its companies and given them the freedom to focus their innovation on different sectors. This is the second advantage the U.S. has over its competitors. While totalitarian governments stifle their own progress through over-regulation, the United States’ policy of decentralization has prompted these competing companies to diversify and specialize. I argue that this process will place the U.S. ahead of its adversaries with finality.
The diversity of AI’s applications can be seen in many sectors. Shield AI, a military and aeronautical-based company contracted by the Department of War, unveiled its first AI-operated fighter drone, the X-Bat, capable of flying missions autonomously without a fighter pilot or crew. Instagram, Snapchat, and X have developed their own AI chatbots to enhance their user’s experience on their platforms. OpenAI’s ChatGPT and similar platforms have been implemented at Universities in the CSU system to advance student learning further. I even recently visited a Carl’s Jr and had my order taken by an AI crew member. So many of our industries are learning how to implement this technology effectively and ineffectively to improve their companies.
While you may argue that these implementations are negative or positive in their own right, my essential point is that we are, at the very least, having these discussions. Our adversaries are still stuck preventing their own AI systems from taking off, or preventing their citizens from using the power of AI to undermine and overthrow their own government. The White House’s policy has enabled these dialogues about the benefits and drawbacks, as well as the remedial actions taken. It has allowed its companies and consumers to have a say in how AI is used. Can the same be said about the companies and consumers in countries like China or Russia?
So, to restate what Executive Order 14365 has dictated to the world at large, “To win, United States AI companies must be free to innovate without cumbersome regulation.” This is how we beat our adversaries, improve our economy, and bolster this country’s National Security. Standing on this country’s long-held belief in freedom, autonomy, and democracy is what gives us, the consumers and entrepreneurs, the power to use AI in an ethical and world-impacting way.