An FAA-style regulator for AI would be an extremely slow, permission-based system — modeled on aircraft type certification that takes 5 to 9 years — and applying that logic to AI, which currently ships new versions every couple of months, would cause the US to lose the AI race to China.
Sacks argues Dario Amodei's proposed 'FAA for AI' is a much more extreme idea than it sounds, since real FAA aircraft certification takes years, and importing that model to fast-moving AI would cause the US to cede the AI race to China. ✦ AI generated
David Sacks · All-In Podcast · 2026-07-18 · original ↗
starts at this moment · 11:51
“Saxs, is this the best of the uh possibilities in your mind? uh is the industry regulating itself after they have now provoked governments around the world to be so concerned about this issue.”
What the FAA does, among other things, is approve new airplane designs. And specifically, it requires what's called a type certification for any new aircraft design or major changes. And for an entirely new aircraft design, it takes 5 to 9 years to get the certification. And if you merely want to amend a certificate, I guess for major changes, it takes three to five years.
verbatim transcript · starts at 11:51
11:51And specifically, it requires what's called a type certification for any new aircraft design or major changes. And for an entirely new aircraft design, it takes 5 to 9 years >> to get the certification. And if you merely want to amend a certificate, I guess for you know major changes or I'm not even sure how major the changes need to be, it takes three to five years. So
12:16the Boeing 737 Max, for example, took about 5 years. So this is permissionbased regulation. There's no approval, no flying commercially. It's safety first. Look, that might make sense in the case of preventing plane crashes, but when you're talking about AI models, you're talking about replacing a system that is releasing new versions every couple of months with one that is potentially fully under the control of government, fully government
12:44approved. Everything has to be certified, and you could expect the timeline to go from months to years. Again, I think we'll just simply lose AI race if that happens because China is not going to abide by those rules. So just to sum up, if my choices are between FAA for AI or what I would call the DMV for AI, I would much rather go for Demis' SRO for AI, the
13:05self-regulatory approach. But we really have to keep it honest and pure because again otherwise it'll just be the opening bid in a coming new wave of regulation and it will be the vehicle for massive regulatory capture. >> To your point, it can't restrict. >> Yeah. >> Can't restrict open source. I think that's so important because all of these other efforts require money that you have to spend which is always where
13:30regulatory capture happens and you have to enable startups and open source to compete effectively. >> Shimoth, any thoughts on this new self-governing body? >> I think it's really important and I hope it happens quickly. The thing we have to keep in mind is there's going to be a torrent of money that's going to try to influence both sides of the political aisle to regulate this in a way that creates some
- ·FAA requires 'type certification' for new aircraft designs
- ·New aircraft design certification takes 5–9 years
- ·Amending an existing certificate takes 3–5 years
- ·AI ships new model versions every couple of months
- ·Aircraft-style permission system is far slower than AI's pace
- ·Multi-year approvals can't fit a 2-month release cycle
- ·Adopting this model risks ceding the AI race to China