The debate over the pace of artificial intelligence (AI) development is shaking the United States.

The debate was ignited from within the AI industry. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei recently warned that "within 6 to 12 months, swarms of AI agents could gain the ability to take over the entire internet through persistent botnets," calling for a slowdown in advanced AI development. Elon Musk said, "Dario is right," and OpenAI's Sam Altman also lent support, stating, "We need to regulate the speed of frontier AI."

However, NVIDIA CEO Jensen Huang took the exact opposite stance. While stating that products should not be released if their safety cannot be guaranteed, he argued, "No new laws or new regulations are needed," and urged, "Run as fast as possible." He argued that the speed of innovation and safety are not mutually exclusive choices.

The Trump administration also drew a line against "AI doomsdayism." President Trump dismissed claims that AI would take over humanity as a "hoax," and Vice President JD Vance described the sight of AI companies coming to the government to ask for their own regulation as feeling "like a Trojan horse." Concerns were also raised that slowing down AI development could cede the upper hand to China.

Clashes have also intensified in the political arena. In the Democratic Party, calls for congressional intervention continued, with lawmakers arguing, "We must seize the industry's warning that AI is beginning to slip out of human control as an opportunity," and "The era of self-regulation is over." Senator Bernie Sanders argued that the AI industry is being swayed by a tiny fraction of the wealthy, stating, "We must not let big tech oligarchs decide the future of humanity."

On the other hand, the Republican leadership opposes a blanket halt to development. House Speaker Mike Johnson argued that AI companies can regulate their own pace, stating, "Halting development would hand a competitive advantage to China." Senate Minority Leader John Thune also stated, "We must not hand the future of AI over to China or other adversaries."

Beneath the surface of the debate lies suspicion over whether the "calls for regulation" by AI companies are truly intended solely for safety. The criticism is that as regulations become stricter, it favors established large corporations that can absorb the massive costs, potentially further cementing their market dominance. In fact, in the U.S., some point out that demands by major AI companies for exemptions for inter-firm cooperation alongside regulations could serve as a barrier protecting incumbent businesses.

However, Alex Turner, a former Google DeepMind researcher, pointed out that "these are corporations and they want to make money," noting that big tech's words should not be taken at face value, while also drawing a line against claims that corporations will magically solve safety issues on their own.

Amid a fierce clash between claims of an "existential threat" and an exaggerated "fear-mongering" narrative, entangled with the U.S.-China AI hegemony competition and the interests of big tech, the debate surrounding AI regulation is expected to remain a major issue not only in the upcoming U.S. midterm elections less than two months away, but also at the summit between President Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping scheduled for this month.

(Reported by JIN Sang-myeong | Video by Ahn Jun-hyeok | Produced by SBS Digital News)