The Chinese public discourse is completely unaware of x-risk.
Someone needs to go onto Chinese media platforms to promote AI alignment and x-risk.
Show your face, state that you are an atheist, a materialist, a highly educated person, and an industry expert. Open with a couple of sentences in Chinese (e.g., “Hello, friends in China”), express some understanding of China’s existing public discourse — they do have a point to some extent, but x-risk is also very real.
Popularize the most fundamental concepts, and make clear that within the industry, it is the actual frontline researchers — not managers or stakeholders — who are deeply concerned about this.
Addendum: You could also amplify your impact more efficiently through collaborative discussions or joint livestreams with major content creators.
Major social media/content platforms in China:
· Long-form video: Bilibili
· Short-form video: Douyin, Kuaishou
· Q&A: Zhihu
· Text/image-based platforms: Weibo, Xiaohongshu (Little Red Book, with a predominantly female user base)
China is actively building multilateral platforms for global AI governance. In July, 29 countries – including Russia, Kazakhstan, Laos, Pakistan and Indonesia – signed a landmark agreement in Shanghai to establish the China-backed World AI Cooperation Organisation (Waico).
“Fear mongering, confrontation, competition will just disrupt [the] process of global AI governance,” Guo Jiakun, a spokesperson for China’s Foreign Ministry, said on Monday, per an English translation published by Reuters.
He was responding to a question about U.S. CEOs, including Anthropic’s Dario Amodei, OpenAI’s Sam Altman and Elon Musk, calling for the industry to slow down because of the dangers rapid advances in the technology pose.
I’ve a hard time interpreting the stance of the CCP on AI risks, mostly due to being quite uninformed. From skimming a few articles, on the surface it sounds like they’re not worried about x- or s-risks, but rather about the weaponization of AI capabilities by their adversaries.
The AI Safety Governance Framework 3.0 (《人工智能安全治理框架3.0》was released on September 14 as a national-level industry guidance framework document, which may be helpful for understanding this issue.The document comes with an English version.
Why do you think stating one is atheist and materialist should be part of the message? I thought such statements were read as performative / a distinct political register, which would weaken the message. Similar to how a CEO talking about “synergies” and the like would imply the object-level contents of what they are saying are probably not the point.
Because public opinion in China generally interprets AI doomerism through a religious-cultural lens, conflating X-risk with traditional eschatology.
References:
Bilibili video: “AGI: How It Is Becoming a New Religion” https://b23.tv/RWjQ4Za
Self-media article: “The Person with the Greatest Influence on U.S. AI Strategy Turns Out to Be a Delusional Cult Leader”https://user.guancha.cn/wap/content?id=1696524
A large number of users across various forums and comment sections who support this claim.
I am a Chinese American math professor at Georgia Tech (https://alkjash.github.io/), and I have been passively interested in understanding how to message to China although it’s quite intimidating.
If someone becomes the face of such as movement, there’s a risk of there being released a “hidden camera” video of them (well, their face and voice; quid est veritas?) saying – in unaccented American – that their ulterior plan is to keep China down so democratic AI can dominate instead, which might set back for a long time more distributed movements that might potentially emerge … hmm, that’s not a bad idea.
I think the probability of the government intervening in personal behavior through such means is extremely low, and members of the general public are largely similar across different regions. I am merely considering that foreigners doing this kind of outreach enjoy a natural advantage in Chinese public discourse. They can be clearly distinguished from Chinese self‑media influencers who will say anything for money。
The Chinese public discourse is completely unaware of x-risk.
Someone needs to go onto Chinese media platforms to promote AI alignment and x-risk.
Show your face, state that you are an atheist, a materialist, a highly educated person, and an industry expert. Open with a couple of sentences in Chinese (e.g., “Hello, friends in China”), express some understanding of China’s existing public discourse — they do have a point to some extent, but x-risk is also very real.
Popularize the most fundamental concepts, and make clear that within the industry, it is the actual frontline researchers — not managers or stakeholders — who are deeply concerned about this.
Addendum: You could also amplify your impact more efficiently through collaborative discussions or joint livestreams with major content creators.
Major social media/content platforms in China:
· Long-form video: Bilibili
· Short-form video: Douyin, Kuaishou
· Q&A: Zhihu
· Text/image-based platforms: Weibo, Xiaohongshu (Little Red Book, with a predominantly female user base)
I would be happy to assist if needed.
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/politics/article/3367349/chinas-intelligence-chief-warns-risks-ai-new-arena-strategic-rivalry
https://www.cnbc.com/2026/09/14/china-ai-slowdown-us-tech-ceos.html
I’ve a hard time interpreting the stance of the CCP on AI risks, mostly due to being quite uninformed. From skimming a few articles, on the surface it sounds like they’re not worried about x- or s-risks, but rather about the weaponization of AI capabilities by their adversaries.
The AI Safety Governance Framework 3.0 (《人工智能安全治理框架3.0》was released on September 14 as a national-level industry guidance framework document, which may be helpful for understanding this issue.The document comes with an English version.
https://www.tc260.org.cn/tc260/xwdt1/202609/e879077a3caa4722b2206d1bcaed5a6c.shtml
Why do you think stating one is atheist and materialist should be part of the message? I thought such statements were read as performative / a distinct political register, which would weaken the message. Similar to how a CEO talking about “synergies” and the like would imply the object-level contents of what they are saying are probably not the point.
Because public opinion in China generally interprets AI doomerism through a religious-cultural lens, conflating X-risk with traditional eschatology.
References: Bilibili video: “AGI: How It Is Becoming a New Religion” https://b23.tv/RWjQ4Za Self-media article: “The Person with the Greatest Influence on U.S. AI Strategy Turns Out to Be a Delusional Cult Leader”https://user.guancha.cn/wap/content?id=1696524 A large number of users across various forums and comment sections who support this claim.
Xiaohongshu is Rednote in English btw
I am a Chinese American math professor at Georgia Tech (https://alkjash.github.io/), and I have been passively interested in understanding how to message to China although it’s quite intimidating.
Please contact me if you’d like to chat.
If someone becomes the face of such as movement, there’s a risk of there being released a “hidden camera” video of them (well, their face and voice; quid est veritas?) saying – in unaccented American – that their ulterior plan is to keep China down so democratic AI can dominate instead, which might set back for a long time more distributed movements that might potentially emerge … hmm, that’s not a bad idea.
I think the probability of the government intervening in personal behavior through such means is extremely low, and members of the general public are largely similar across different regions. I am merely considering that foreigners doing this kind of outreach enjoy a natural advantage in Chinese public discourse. They can be clearly distinguished from Chinese self‑media influencers who will say anything for money。