It's not a conspiracy. There's a finite amount of compute available, and they will sell it to the highest bidder. If another company can produce the same intelligence for cheaper, then they will drive the price down.
Is it fair to characterize a founder of a failed startup as a con man? I.e. did he make claims that were factually untrue, and intentionally deceived investors?
Having adequate law enforcement training and funding, is not mutually exclusive with leveraging technology for more effective enforcement. In fact that's where some of the funding goes. I would be interested in seeing some data reflecting a reduction in crime as a result of increasing the welfare system, as you claim.
Not a chance. Even if American companies did abide by it, there is no reason Chinese companies would. And good luck definitely proving that a model trained on it.
That problem along with its many solutions are surely littered throughout the training data. Not to mention, it would be trivial to overfit on that problem. I don't know why people still reference that.