The key point here is not just that "open source AI is important," but that AI is directly defined as a fundamental production factor for modern enterprises. Chamath's logic is that if the U.S. blocks the open source path, companies will have to use more expensive tools to accomplish the same tasks, and the cost gap will quickly turn into a profit gap.

From a capital perspective, he is actually warning of two layers of risk. The first layer is that the valuations of ordinary companies will be compressed due to rising operating costs; the second layer is that the valuations of closed-source model providers like Anthropic and OpenAI will also be distorted, as their revenues will no longer come entirely from market competition, but from policy-created scarcity.

Historically, whenever the government forcibly intervenes in the supply of "means of production," the market always asks one question: Is this creating a protective umbrella for certain companies? If the answer is yes, stock prices may rise in the short term due to scarcity expectations, but in the long term, they will be pressured by cost spillover and competitive distortion.

Essentially, this is about regulatory changes: AI models are transitioning from technical products to policy variables, and what capital markets fear most is that input costs are rewritten through administrative means, as this will make valuation models lose comparability.

ABAB News · Law of Cognition

Once input costs change, the entire valuation model will follow suit.
Regulation creates scarcity, and the market will reprice.
The more AI resembles infrastructure, the more it fears administrative intervention.