The Cognitive Revolution

Anton Leicht on keeping AI power from concentrating

Anton Leicht· Fellow, Technology and International Affairs at Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
·~2 hr·English·The Cognitive Revolution
AI SafetyPolicyAI InfrastructureBusiness Strategy
TL;DR

Carnegie fellow Anton Leicht argues that AI power concentrates by default - inside the labs, in Washington, and between the US and the rest of the world - so the realistic goal is not a grand plan but to keep threading the needle, nudging power back toward balance so we muddle through.

01Core Mental Model

The Trend Line, Not the Level

Today's models are not very dangerous at their current level; what worries Leicht is the trend line and two thresholds we are close to - labs whose internal progress outruns any outside oversight, and models good enough at bio and pharma to be genuinely dangerous.

we're nearing a point where the pace of development inside the labs just breaks away from the pace of democratic oversight and democratic insight into what's happening

Anton Leicht, The Cognitive Revolution
Key Insight
The framing quietly moves the safety debate from 'what can a model do today' to 'who is watching when it crosses the line' - a governance problem, not a capabilities one.

02US-China Deal

A Pause Is a Gift to China

A frontier-only pause would let China keep out-producing the US across robotics, manufacturing and energy while it closes the one gap the US leads on - chips - so Washington is very unlikely to accept it.

if you look at all the domains of strategic competition China is basically eating America's lunch in most of them

Anton Leicht, The Cognitive Revolution
Key Insight
It reframes a pause as an arms-control concession rather than a safety measure: the sticking point is not whether it helps alignment but who it helps geopolitically.

03Markets

The Pause Is an Expectations Game

Whether a pause tanks the market is an expectations game: a lab-led pause sold as reliability could even calm investors, but a policy-shock pause reads as radical and sends the smart money running for the exits.

the pause currently still reads as such a radical policy proposal and such an unprecedented policy intervention that I think any conservative market analyst and a lot of the smart money will think well this is getting very volatile

Anton Leicht, The Cognitive Revolution
Key Insight
The market reaction is endogenous to the framing, which means the labs, not regulators, may hold the real lever over whether a pause is survivable.

04The Nation State

The Gamble He Won't Take

Leicht is less worried about authoritarian states than about liberal democracy, whose monopoly of violence and role as arbiter of disputes both erode once everyone carries a personal superintelligence.

on that gamble I'm much less willing to roll the dice and I'd much rather figure out how we can sort of integrate these capabilities with some functioning version of the nation state

Anton Leicht, The Cognitive Revolution
Key Insight
The uncomfortable implication: the political systems most worth protecting are the ones AI destabilizes fastest, because their power rests on consent and legibility that superintelligence dissolves.

05Who Controls It

Control Is More Stable in Beijing

Counterintuitively, China's tiered, state-controlled diffusion is a more stable equilibrium than America's open market, so China may absorb powerful AI more smoothly than a more volatile US.

So if that is a stable equilibrium then I think China can stabilize it around it much more quickly than a much more volatile US

Anton Leicht, The Cognitive Revolution
Key Insight
It inverts the usual story that open societies adapt better - here openness is the liability and central control is the feature, which is an awkward conclusion for AI's home team.

06Domestic Policy

Auditors Running on Good Faith

Independent auditors like METR and Redwood are stuck relying on the labs' good faith, and the fastest fix is executive pressure - an approved-evaluator list the labs must actually let in.

apparently they're just too reliant on the good faith of the AI companies because of the voluntary dynamic

Anton Leicht, The Cognitive Revolution
Key Insight
Voluntary access means the auditors' real dependency is political will, not technical skill - the missing ingredient is leverage, and only the executive can supply it cheaply.

07The Rest of the World

Rich, but Disempowered

Most of the world will get richer in absolute terms yet be strategically disempowered, and Europe's one real card is its chip-tooling chokehold, which it can trade for assured frontier access.

building these systems ourselves is just too expensive it doesn't actually work so the next best thing we can think about is how do we get access to frontier models in a way that is assured and secure

Anton Leicht, The Cognitive Revolution
Key Insight
Disempowerment, not extinction, is the median outcome for most countries - so the AI agenda most of the world needs is about distribution and leverage, not just alignment.

08The Endgame

Fine Until It Isn't

Leicht's answer to the doomer-shorts challenge is that catastrophe is not a smooth slide you can bet against - things look great until they suddenly do not - and his best case is simply to muddle through by keeping power from concentrating.

a lot of the ways in which things go badly are just like things go extremely well in the market just all the way until they go really badly. And then the only situation where you cash in is when you're dead

Anton Leicht, The Cognitive Revolution
Key Insight
If doom has no tradeable signature, markets cannot price it - so financial optimism about AI tells you nothing about its safety, only that the cliff has not arrived yet.