The Alliance for a Better Future is calling for a strategic American approach to artificial intelligence that mirrors the ambition of the 1960s space race. the group argues that the U.S. must implement rigorous safety guardrails to protect citizens while ensuring the nation remains the dominant global leader in AI development.
Why 75% of Americans distrust AI builders
A significant crisis of confidence currently undermines the deployment of artificial intelligence in the United States. According to the Alliance for a Better Future,more than three-quarters of Americans do not trust AI or the individuals building these systems. This skepticism stems from a perceived misalignment between the values of Silicon Valley billionaires and the needs of the general public.
The report suggests that the public remains unconvinced that AI's power is being directed toward beneficial outcomes. While the tech industry often views safety regulations as hindrances to innovation, the Alliance for a Better Future argues that the current trajectory risks eliminating the "American dream" for millions of workers rather than enhancing it. To bridge this gap, the organization suggests that the industry must prioritize healthcare breakthroughs and tools that support workers rather than threatening their livelihoods.
The race against China's government-backed AI
The geopolitical stakes of AI development are framed as an existential struggle for the American way of life. As reported by the Alliance for a Better Future, China is pusuing AI development with full government backing and no intention of "playing fair." The organization warns that if the U.S. hesitates due to excessive caution, the most influential technology in human history could be controlled by adversaries intent on destroying democratic values.
To counter this, the Alliance for a Better Future draws a parallel to the early 1960s,when President John F. Kennedy committed the nation to reaching the moon. That era proved that the U.S. could achieve economic and national security supremacy by balancing bold declarations with disciplined engineering. The current AI landsacpe is viewed as a similar "moonshot" where the U.S. must build, test, and iterate safety measures in real-time to maintain its competitive edge.
Blocking suicide coaching and sexualized chats for children
General calls for "safety" are insufficient; the Alliance for a Better Future demands specific, concrete protections for vulnerable populations. The organization argues that AI governance must include hard limits to protect children and the elderly from scams, suicide coaching, and sexualized chat interactions. Furthermore, they insist that financial information must remain private and that AI agents be kept "on a leash" to prevent autonomous systems from causing unnoticed damage.
Beyond digital safety, there is a strong emphasis on the "dignity of work." The Alliance for a Better Future claims that AI should be engineered to create new employment opportunities rather than erasing existing jobs, asserting that the stability of families and communities depends on this commitment.
President-elect Trump's upcoming executive order on AI guardrails
The political landscape is shifting as the next administration prepares to address these challenges. According to the source, President-elect Trump is preparing a new executive order designed to establish national security guardrails for AI. This move is intended to leverage the benefits of the technology while lowering systemic risks, following the "build and improve" philosophy that guided previous American industrial successes.
Who defines the 'leash' for AI agents?
Despite the call for action, several critical questions remain unanswered. While the Alliance for a Better Future warns against handing the rules over to "Silicon Valley lawyers" or foreign regulators,it does not specify exactly which regulatory body or bipartisan coalition should hold the pen. There is also a lack of clarity on how the government will enforce the requirement that AI "creates work" in a market driven by corporate efficiency.
Additionally, the report focuses heavily on the American perspective, leaving it unclear how the U.S. intends to coordinate these "American-made" guardrails with existing international frameworks,such as those being developed in Europe, without triggering the very regulatory conflict the authors fear.
Comments 0