With racing, there’s a difference between optimizing the chance of winning vs optimizing the extent to which you beat the other party when you do win. If it’s true that China is currently pretty far behind, and if TAI timelines are fairly short so that a lead now is pretty significant, then the best version of “racing” shouldn’t be “get to the finish line as fast as possible.” Instead, it should be “use your lead to your advantage.” So, the lead time should be used to reduce risks.
Not sure this is relevant to your post in particular; I could’ve made this point also in other discussions about racing. Of course, if a lead is small or non-existent, the considerations will be different.
It seems important to establish whether we are in fact going to be in a race and whether one side isn’t already far ahead.
With racing, there’s a difference between optimizing the chance of winning vs optimizing the extent to which you beat the other party when you do win. If it’s true that China is currently pretty far behind, and if TAI timelines are fairly short so that a lead now is pretty significant, then the best version of “racing” shouldn’t be “get to the finish line as fast as possible.” Instead, it should be “use your lead to your advantage.” So, the lead time should be used to reduce risks.
Not sure this is relevant to your post in particular; I could’ve made this point also in other discussions about racing. Of course, if a lead is small or non-existent, the considerations will be different.
Yep, makes sense. I think if I modify the model to shorten timelines & widen the gap between PRC and US the answer could flip.