Sam is playing the "maximum usefulness" strategy.
He refuses to draw hard lines the state will reject, stays flexible on deployment, points to the risk being there but can be managed, and offers politicians politically convenient upside (like a public wealth fund). This makes OpenAI the easier, lower-friction partner for actual government use today.
Anthropic took the opposite bet...Release Mythos with months of delay and many warnings, use credible safety concerns to become the company the state feels it can safely hand real power to, while helping write rules that raise the bar for everyone else. That approach works until the state decides the constraints are costing it capability it wants vs what others can achieve (nations/companies).
Right now, imo Sam has the short-term edge because AI isnt code red right now, governments prioritize usable power over moral consistency when the technology is this strong. The real long-term filter, however, remains who can actually keep producing frontier intelligence. Philosophy only matters until one side clearly pulls ahead on raw capability. The more dangerous they get, the more the philosophy/brand/image that wants harsher Owellian control wins... So unless Sam pivots, if AI keeps getting better Anthrophic is building a better government image.
I also predict, whoever becomes the layer of AI safety (beyond filters and jailbreaks) will have massive leverage.