Part I of VIII

Before asking whether AI can self-govern, understand what it is: systems where raw capability scales reliably with compute, and where access to that compute is expensive.

A modern AI model (the thing behind ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini) is a very large file of numbers. Those numbers, called weights, encode patterns learned by reading an enormous amount of text. A large model might have 100 billion of them. That file is the model.

Training is how those numbers get produced. The process is almost comically simple: show the model a sentence, ask it to predict the next word, tell it how wrong it was, and adjust the numbers a tiny bit. Do that billions of times across trillions of words, and something unexpected happens. The model generalizes in ways nobody explicitly taught it. It reasons, writes code, translates. Pattern-matching at sufficient scale produces capabilities that weren’t designed in.

Each training run costs $100M to $1B+1 in compute. Each new generation is often trained with its predecessor as a collaborator, so capability compounds across generations. Investors expect labs to recoup that cost by selling API access and products, which creates pressure to deploy quickly. Once a lab releases a model’s weights publicly (“open weights”), there is no recall. No patch, no withdrawal, no undo. Once in the world, open weights can be run by anyone, anywhere, permanently outside any government’s reach.

Compute, raw processing power from specialized chips, sits at the center of this economy. More compute plus more data reliably produces more capable models. That relationship has held for over a decade: training compute has grown at roughly 4.4x per year since 2010.2 Whoever controls the most compute can train the most capable models. The race for AI capability is, at bottom, a race for a physical resource. The most capable models (including frontier models not yet released to the public) can now find software vulnerabilities that elude human experts and automated testing tools.32