The man who spent a decade warning that AI could end humanity now says it probably will not, and that we should enjoy the ride.
His own estimate of the odds is up to one in five that it ends catastrophically, a number he now files under acceptable risk.
His proposed safeguard is that rival labs get two weeks with each other's models before release, and hold a phone call every few weeks.
That is the entire mechanism, competitors checking competitors, with governments informed only afterwards, and only if something looks very dangerous indeed.
You might expect governments to object, but in June Washington answered with a security framework for frontier models that is explicitly voluntary.
The same administration has told its lawyers to challenge state AI laws, and Brussels has pushed its strictest rules back sixteen months.
Because everyone is watching the same rival. China generates more than twice America's electricity, and power, not chips, is now the binding constraint.
America's answer was to starve China of chips, and by Musk's own account that lead is closing faster than most people realise.
Each side holds half of what it needs, and neither eases off while the other accelerates, which is the definition of a chicken game.
And the watchers are not neutral - the man proposing the system has been in court with one of the labs he would be watching.
Meanwhile that lab is worth eight hundred and fifty billion dollars and preparing to list, which is not the posture of an industry expecting brakes.
So the plan is that they watch each other, a decade of warnings ending not in rules, but in a standing invitation to keep going.