a16z Lianchuang Changwen responds to US AI regulation: the dual extreme narrative between “extreme freedom to innovate” and “extreme regulatory order”

Comparing news, a16z co-founder Marc Andreessen published a long, ironic article on the X platform. He expressed the issue of “AI regulation” and presented the conflict of positions through two extreme narratives.

In the “opposition to AI regulation” narrative, Marc Andreessen portrays regulation as a force that suppresses innovation, could stifle garage start-ups, weaken the Silicon Valley ecosystem, increase compliance burdens, limit the development of AI and computing power infrastructure, and satirize “American AI regulators would ban horse-drawn carriages if they had controlled our grandfather.”

In the narrative of “supporting AI regulation,” Marc Andreessen also ironically describes the order, safety, and industrial compliance system expansion that may be brought about by the regulatory system, including large-scale compliance industries, strengthened government regulatory frameworks, and social redistribution mechanisms.

However, Marc Andreessen did not give a single conclusion throughout the article, but rather highlighted the long-standing structural conflict and rift between “freedom to innovate” and “security governance” through highly exaggerated language comparisons.

Earlier, Anthropic issued a statement saying that the US government issued an export control order on the grounds of national security powers to suspend all access rights of any foreign entity to the artificial intelligence models Fable 5 and Mythos 5, regardless of whether the person is in the US or not, including Anthropic employees who are foreign citizens.