The AI Safety Menu

All laws

U.S. compute cap

Hard cap on training compute. No training run above a fixed ceiling set at about today's largest runs, and the ceiling never rises.

Cuts lead by~13 monthsof America's lead over China, over 3 years
Cuts p(doom) by~0.4%from a 5% starting estimate
Holds up● Training● Lab's own use● Public release
Enact it on the menuSee the findings

What it does

No training run may use more computing power than today's largest runs, and the limit never rises.

Applies to: All training runs above the cap (say 10^27 FLOP).

Where things stand

No jurisdiction has a hard cap. Thresholds in SB 53 and the EU AI Act trigger obligations, not prohibitions.

Why it costs ~13 months

A cap freezes the size of training runs while better algorithms keep coming. A year in, the U.S. frontier is about four months behind where it would have been.

Biggest unknown: How much frontier progress comes from compute scaling versus algorithms and post-training.

Why it lowers p(doom) by ~0.4%

Stops anyone in the U.S. training models much more powerful than today's.

Capping scale directly limits how capable U.S. models get. But it doesn't bind China and pushes progress into better algorithms, so the effect is uncertain.

The strongest case that it costs more

Compute is the input the U.S. leads on. Epoch and RAND put the U.S. hardware lead at about four years and its compute capacity at roughly ten times China's. A cap surrenders the one advantage that export controls protect. The lead cost could be the entire lead within two years.

The debate

For

Against

Sources

Rough starting points, not precise forecasts. Lead costs assume China doesn't depend on U.S. models, the case least favorable to safety laws, and count 3 years. On the menu you can change every assumption and put in your own numbers. Last priced 2026-09-26.