Michael Darius Eastwood · Independent AI alignment researcher
Published
Rows 10 through 15 of the register concentrate in a three-week window in June 2026. Four events, four institutions, one direction of travel. This article walks through them in the order they happened and explains why the pattern is worth taking seriously without inflating any single row.
The European Commission published the EU Tech Sovereignty Package on 3 June 2026. It bundles Chips Act 2.0 and the Cloud and AI Development Act (CADA). Commissioner Virkkunen said the aim was to "be sure nobody has a kill switch." The framing is anti-foreign-kill-switch, not pro-EU-kill-switch. The truth gate enforces that distinction. The primary source is the CNBC report of Virkkunen's remarks on the day.
Jack Clark, Anthropic co-founder, argued on Newsnight that recursive self-improvement in AI amounts to a "gas pedal but no brake pedal", making the case for a slowdown mechanism inside the labs. He restated the same argument on CNN. This is row 15 of the register. Priority on the framing belongs to Clark and Anthropic. The programme's role is to note that the framing arrived approximately eighteen months after the December 2024 manuscript, whose central argument is that no external brake will bind a sufficiently capable system.
US Commerce and BIS ordered Fable 5 and Mythos 5 offline: the first export-control action against a deployed commercial AI model. This is row 10 of the register, and it is treated in a separate article on this site. What matters here is timing: nine days after the EU package, seven days after Clark's Newsnight interview, and seven days before Macron's G7 speech.
President Macron addressed G7 Évian with a "strictly nationalist" critique and a "trusted partners" framework. His line, "nobody will buy US AI if they fear it can be switched off overnight," is on record in the CNBC and broadbandbreakfast coverage. On the same day, Jack Clark restated the brake-pedal argument on BBC World Service The Interview with Faisal Islam. Faisal Islam is the same journalist Eastwood emailed on 7 January 2026, and the coincidence of interviewer and interviewee is a record, not a claim about causation.
The Chokepoint sections of the book argue that AI's supply chain and inference architecture concentrate leverage at chokepoints controlled by specific states. All four June events assume that framing without adopting it by name: the EU treats compute sovereignty as a policy variable; the US treats deployment sovereignty as an enforcement variable; Macron treats sovereignty of use as a diplomatic variable; Clark treats internal-brake sovereignty as a research variable. Four different levers, one framing.
The register does not claim any of these institutions read the book, cite the book, or acted on the book. Priority on each event belongs to the institution named on the row. What the register claims is that four independent institutions took actions along the same direction of travel inside a three-week window, on top of the fifteen earlier convergences already logged, and that a reader can check the primary sources on each row before deciding what pattern, if any, that constitutes.
From the book Infinite Architects: Intelligence, Recursion, and the Creation of Everything by Michael Darius Eastwood.