A Greek saying warns against trusting Greeks with gifts. In the context of today’s politics, perhaps we should be cautious around AI companies advocating for regulation.
Dario Amodei, who co-founded Anthropic, stirred up a debate on Saturday when he suggested that AI development should be slowed due to potential risks to humanity, as mentioned in a post on his website. This viewpoint quickly received support from notable figures like Sam Altman of OpenAI, Elon Musk of SpaceX, and Dennis Hassabis from Google DeepMind, as reported by the Wall Street Journal. Interestingly, Amodei also requested that governments should exempt the AI sector from antitrust laws that typically prevent industry-wide coordination, though other AI leaders were not eager to support this call.
Critics of Anthropic argue that the major AI players might be motivated by a desire to solidify their dominance and hinder rivals from catching up.
An Anthropic spokesperson did not respond when asked about the reasoning behind the need for an antitrust exemption to allow a slowdown.
Recently, OpenAI has inquired with lawmakers about the legality of a potential industry-wide slowdown, as noted by Wired.
Requests for clarification from OpenAI and SpaceX regarding their positions on an antitrust exemption went unanswered. Meanwhile, other AI companies expressed doubt about the necessity of regulating the industry.
Nvidia’s CEO, Jensen Huang, and Meta’s CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, dismissed the idea of coordinating an AI slowdown, asserting that there’s no real need for enhanced regulation regarding AI safety, as per CNBC.
Huang commented, “It’s unnecessary to create new laws or exemptions for these companies to conduct their engineering responsibly before launching products.” He emphasized that safety and testing are engineering challenges, not issues that require new regulations.
Zuckerberg also stated that sufficient incentives exist for labs to ensure AI safety. A Meta spokesperson highlighted the prevailing responsibility that labs have to proceed cautiously in training their models.
Last month I wrote about how we can build a positive and safe future for everyone: https://t.co/1KtONlqBs5
Every lab has the responsibility and incentive to move at the pace required to train its models safely, and the ability to take its own actions to ensure that happens.
The…
— Mark Zuckerberg (@finkd) September 15, 2026
Zuckerberg added that labs would face considerable liability for harm caused by their models, providing further motivation to prevent any issues.
However, key antitrust regulators reacted skeptically to the proposition of granting an antitrust waiver to the leading AI firms.
FTC chair Andrew Ferguson expressed concerns over companies collectively seeking regulatory changes alongside an antitrust exemption, raising alarms about potential motivations. He indicated that such requests could be viewed as efforts to ensure their market dominance remains unchallenged.
Meta, like other top AI labs, has postponed launching advanced models, including its Muse AI agent, for several months to prioritize safety, according to the Associated Press.
In response, former President Donald Trump and his advisors sharply criticized the idea of regulating AI development, particularly targeting Amodei. (RELATED: Companies ‘Can Stop Any Time They Want To’: Congress Presses Bessent On AI Oversight)
Trump commented on Truth Social, asserting that AI does not require new oversight, emphasizing that a competent leader is sufficient to manage the technology. He accused those advocating for regulation of hiding behind a conspiracy theory that could undermine the U.S. while favoring China.
Additionally, Trump described the notion that AI poses a threat or that data centers are detrimental to communities as a “hoax” in another post on Truth Social.
A spokesperson from the White House referred inquiries back to the president’s comments on the matter.
David Sacks, a former advisor during the Trump administration on AI issues, challenged the need for an antitrust exemption on X, questioning the intentions of companies seeking regulatory waivers for the purpose of forming a cartel.
Dario has written that we need to “pace the frontier,” and Sam has agreed. People may be surprised by my response: go ahead.
You guys are the frontier. By any reasonable metric — market share, revenue growth, model capability — the two of you have a duopoly on frontier…
— David Sacks (@DavidSacks) September 13, 2026
Sacks claimed that Amodei and Altman were likely trying to create a government-sanctioned monopoly, shifting accountability away from themselves and utilizing regulations to limit competition. In his view, it is misleading for anyone to consider this a positive move for the public.
An unnamed source close to the White House asserted that Trump is genuinely concerned about the AI race and wants capable individuals to ensure America maintains its technological lead.
According to this source, the push for regulation appears to be a strategic maneuver by Altman and Amodei to set the agenda for their rivals while avoiding repercussions if their technologies cause harm.
With the backlash from various stakeholders, some experts suggest that the idea of an antitrust waiver for AI companies might already be doomed.
“I believe it’s pretty much dead on arrival. There’s been strong resistance from Republicans across the board, and not enough consensus that these companies require an exemption to act responsibly,” commented Evan Swarztrauber, a principal at CorePoint Strategies.
He concluded that skepticism is warranted regarding whether this is an attempt to secure regulatory advantages, defer liability for problematic behavior, or address broader concerns about the AI sector.
