Context

The conversation between Ben Horowitz and Marc Andreessen has lots of sophisticated and enlightened takes. Quite shockingly they sum up the conversation with a (imo) simplified view. I hope I misunderstood them, but it sounded to me like the view is:

Regulation = communism, communism is bad & AI is like nuclear, not investing more in nuclear was bad -> we should not regulate & slow down AI

I'd be happy to be proven wrong but I believe there is a bias at play here:

The view that 'free competition is something to strive for in itself' (rather than that 'competition is the absolute best way to get more economic progress and welfare') has become a dogma. An ideology that people don't realize that they have a hard time questioning objectively.

I naively thought it should be clear that competitive pressures per default make AI outcompete humans to be able to reach their objectives, and that this is bad...

Anyways:

What do you think? Would it be realistic to set up such a public bet?

Would it create a very strong change in public sentiment if the bet turned out in the favor of "Ben changes his mind on AI risk"?

(Relevant info: Ben Horowitz is one of the absolute top voices in VC and AI investing at the moment)