Nathan reports from two weeks in China, including WAIC in Shanghai and an AI safety hub launch at Tsinghua, to examine the American policy argument that any safety obligation is futile because China will not care. He finds that Chinese models and services currently have weaker safeguards than OpenAI and Anthropic, but argues the gap is often overstated once those two leaders are separated from the broader American field. The episode traces China’s “45-degree line” idea that capability and safety should rise together, the university-centered structure of Chinese AI safety work, and the rapid growth of Chinese research on topics like self-replication, deception, evaluation faking, and interpretability. The stakes are whether US policy should be built around a simplified “but China” assumption, or around a more accurate picture of a rival ecosystem that is behind in some ways, converging in others, and paying closer attention to Western AI safety than many Americans realize.For full show notes, links, and references, read the episode page:https://www.cognitiverevolution.ai/nathan-goes-to-china-part-2-ai-safety-with-chinese-characteristics/Sponsor:Claude: Claude by Anthropic is an AI collaborator that understands your workflow and helps you tackle research, writing, coding, and organization with deep context. Get started with Claude and explore Claude Pro at https://claude.ai/tcrCHAPTERS:(((((((((((((((((PRODUCED BY:https://aipodcast.ingSOCIAL LINKS:Website: https://www.cognitiverevolution.aiTwitter (Podcast): https://x.com/cogrev_podcastTwitter (Nathan): https://x.com/labenzLinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/in/nathanlabenz/Youtube: https://youtube.com/@CognitiveRevolutionPodcastApple: https://podcasts.apple.com/de/podcast/the-cognitive-revolution-ai-builders-researchers-and/id1669813431Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/6yHyok3M3BjqzR0VB5MSyk