> This argument doesn't work for countries which don't care what their citizens want, like China.

you didn’t have to use China as an example, the US clearly does not care what its citizens want as the most popular policies are never even discussed or proposed in congress

meanwhile, China destroying their housing market to decommidify it so everyone can have housing…they seem to care about their people more

I don't think people care as much as we'd like them to care about dangers of technologies. It takes a single step outside of technological bubble to see that their opinion of SOTA LLMs is vastly different. To them, AI means ChatGPT and ChatGPT is mostly still the same ChatGPT that it was 3 years ago, with similar failure modes and nothing that would indicate it would kill them, or take their jobs even.

It's the same as it has been with privacy/cybersecurity for decades. Vast majority of population doesn't care about hypothetical dangers, no matter how many essays get published.

So democracies representing will of people doesn't really work in favor of Dario's case here.

History is also not on his side. Limiting technological progress in the name of safety has a pretty poor track record.