The AI Safety Menu

All laws

Threaten to sabotage China's AI

Threatened sabotage of China's AI projects. The U.S. threatens, and if needed carries out, sabotage of rival AI projects it sees as destabilizing.

Grows lead by~4.5 monthsof America's lead over China, over 3 years
Raises p(doom) by~0.1%from a 5% starting estimate
Holds up○ Training○ Lab's own use○ Public release
Enact it on the menuSee the findings

What it does

The U.S. would openly threaten, and be ready to use, cyberattacks or even strikes to wreck a rival's AI project if it looked like a bid for superintelligence dominance. Rivals would be expected to threaten the same, creating a standoff like nuclear deterrence.

Applies to: Rival nations' frontier AI projects.

Where things stand

The U.S. relies on chip export controls and intelligence collection. There is no declared policy of sabotaging foreign AI data centers, and no agreed red lines or verification with China.

Why it gains ~4.5 months

Successful sabotage slows China directly: about six weeks of lead gained a year in. The range is very wide.

Biggest unknown: Whether either side can see a rival's AI progress clearly enough to deter without false alarms that escalate to war.

Why it raises p(doom) by ~0.1%

Not a safety law. Uses cyberattacks and other covert means to slow China's most dangerous AI projects.

Debated. Its authors argue the threat deters a reckless race. Critics say it invites escalation and retaliation. We lean slightly toward more risk.

The strongest case that it costs more

Supporters argue mutual deterrence kept the nuclear peace, and a credible threat to sabotage could do the same for AI.

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.