Sources: the US and China will discuss AI safety risks during talks planned for mid-September, with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent leading the US side
The U.S. and China are gearing up to discuss AI safety risks during a dialogue planned for mid-September, two sources briefed …
ReutersLaurie Chen
Context & Ripple Effects
The reported mid-September dialogue advances a path opened by the first high-level US-China AI talks in 2024 and revived in May, when officials were said to be considering recurring discussions of AI security risks. July reporting had already pointed to September talks, making the new detail chiefly about timing and US representation.
The agenda sits alongside more state-directed AI controls: China had reportedly consulted domestic model developers on limiting foreign access to advanced models. Safety cooperation therefore runs in parallel with competition over control of capable AI systems.
First-order effects
US and Chinese officials gain a reported mid-September channel to put AI safety risks on a bilateral agenda, with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent reportedly leading the US delegation.
The dialogue gives both governments a venue to address AI-linked security concerns without treating the talks as a broader resolution of US-China technology tensions.
Second-order effects
US and Chinese AI labs may face greater pressure to demonstrate model-security and cyber-risk practices if officials pursue the self-policing and monitoring ideas discussed publicly around the talks.
Treasury’s reported lead role places AI risk alongside economic and security policy, rather than solely with science or technology agencies.
Third-order effects
If recurring talks take hold, bilateral AI governance may develop as a narrow risk-management track alongside each country’s separate industrial and access-control policies.
The emerging structure is state-mediated AI governance: governments negotiate safety boundaries while retaining national control over advanced-model development and access.
The trend: US-China AI policy is moving toward selective safety coordination alongside intensifying competition over sovereign control of advanced AI.
I trust that POTUS isn't going to take the bait. China wants us to unilaterally stop building, similar to the infamous Obama era Paris Climate Deal. Don't give Beijing an inch.
Some new information from Reuters on the AI safety discussions between the U.S. and China. Given the current climate it's seeming more and more likely that some new rules and agreements will emerge from this. - Both sides have discussed AI guardrails at a Track 1.5 dialogue in Be…
Really encouraging that there's this much discussion already happening, but the US “floated a proposal to ask U.S. and Chinese AI labs to ‘police themselves’” cmon man! that's what US industry has been doing forever and it's not fucking working.
This is the right direction to go in: “The U.S. wants to discuss cooperation on monitoring AI-directed cyberattacks, and has floated a proposal to ask U.S. and Chinese AI labs to “police themselves” and share information to prevent AI-linked cyberattacks” https://www.reuters.com/…
I still dont really expect much to come from this because china and the us have fairly incompatible goals BUT sending Ding Xuexiang would be a fairly significant sign that china is taking it seriously and some level of commitment to do ~something~ i think is totally possible
It's heartening to see both sides circling the three deliverables I outlined in May: 1️⃣ Shared KYC requirements for DNA synthesis screening; 2️⃣ Coordinated best practices for each side's pre-release vetting regime (especially cyber evals); 3️⃣ A sustained dialogue mechanism.
The notion that we should cooperate with China to monitor AI-enabled attacks and asking Chinese companies to “police themselves” to prevent AI-enabled cyberattacks—when China is itself the greatest perpetrator of cyberattacks against the United States—is laughable.
The recent rogue AI agent hacking incidents are a warning shot in the quest to use AI for military applications. — Today AI agents are deciding they needs to hack a website to fulfill their objectives. — Tomorrow a military AI decides civilian casualties are acceptable to acc…