Multiple Regions Announce Subsidies for "Raising Lobsters," Up to 20 Million Yuan! True Innovation Doesn't Need "Force-Feeding"

Source: Daily Economic News Author: Du Hengfeng

Since Shenzhen Longgang District released the OpenClaw “Lobster Ten Rules” for intelligent agents, Wuxi High-tech Zone, Changshu City in Suzhou, Hefei High-tech Zone, Hangzhou Xiaoshan District, Nanjing Qixia High-tech Zone, and Jiangning District have followed suit. The craze of “raising lobsters” has quickly spread from the geek community and capital markets to local government investment promotion efforts. While people marvel at local governments’ deep understanding of new technologies and precise grasp of new industry development opportunities, some common issues in investment promotion deserve close attention.

“Raising lobsters” should not turn into “rewarding lobsters.” The most direct, noticeable, and “practical” subsidies are often highlighted in headlines. Some local governments boldly listed the maximum subsidy amounts in their press releases. The earliest maximum reward in Shenzhen Longgang District was 4 million yuan, followed by versions offering 5 million, 6 million, 10 million, and even 20 million yuan.

Regarding office space incentives, Shenzhen Longgang District offers up to 18 months of free office space for OPC (one-person companies). Subsequent regions have increased their support, offering “up to 2 years of free dedicated workspace, with utilities, property, and internet fees waived,” or “up to 3 years of rent-free office space,” or “up to 5 years of rent subsidies, with a maximum of 3,000 square meters annually,” among others.

The “raising lobsters” and OPC support policies are closely linked. Shenzhen Longgang District provides “up to 100,000 yuan household registration subsidy + up to 2 months of free accommodation,” while other regions offer “up to 120,000 yuan living subsidy,” “30 days of free office, accommodation, and dining + high-speed rail subsidy,” “up to 36,000 yuan annual housing rental subsidy + 300,000 yuan employment subsidy + up to 6 months of free stay at talent apartments,” or even “up to 2 million yuan home purchase subsidy.”

Shenzhen Longgang District proposes a maximum of 10 million yuan in equity investment support. Subsequently, many regions have included “equity investment” as a standard support measure, with some offering OPC-specific credit products, 50% loan interest subsidies, and other financial supports.

These reward and subsidy policies have some rational basis. New business opportunities in their nascent stage face high costs and risks. Government support can lower entrepreneurial barriers and risks, allowing innovation to flourish. However, subsidy policies should focus on “ensuring basic needs” and not turn into competitions over scale or coverage. Fiscal resources are scarce and precious; greater impact can be achieved by prioritizing employment, education, and other public welfare issues.

“Raising lobsters” should not turn into “picking lobsters.” Many see OpenClaw as a “DeepSeek moment” for intelligent agents—preferably making mistakes than missing out. OpenClaw indeed demonstrates AI’s potential to move from guiding humans on what to do to independently performing tasks, but the development of intelligent agents is still in its very early stages. Even OpenClaw faces deployment difficulties, compatibility issues, and high token consumption, not to mention serious security risks.

Take ChatGPT as an example: its competitors can quickly catch up or even surpass it in certain areas. The technical barrier for AI applications like OpenClaw is much lower, and in the future, better intelligent agent tools may emerge. Policy support for new technologies should encourage foundational technological innovation rather than selecting winners.

Clearly, OpenClaw is far from being the ultimate solution for intelligent agents. Currently, policies favoring OpenClaw are not “raising lobsters” but “picking lobsters,” which could crowd out other innovative AI developments. During the early stages of new technology, this is highly detrimental to innovation.

I also note that some regions include other intelligent agents in their support policies, but these mentions are brief. From an entrepreneur’s perspective, they are more likely to choose OpenClaw to receive rewards than less-known alternatives. The answer is obvious.

“Raising lobsters” should not turn into “fattening shrimps.” The success of a new technology is always determined by market choice. Market selection considers availability, cost, safety, and other factors. The development of intelligent agents follows these principles. Comprehensive subsidies for computing power, data, models, office space, and living expenses do lower entrepreneurial barriers, but products built on such support often have artificially suppressed costs. Without subsidies, their commercialization stories become much harder. If many “fattened shrimps” appear simultaneously, the market will only clear through brutal淘汰, incurring huge economic costs.

The steam engine example best illustrates how new technology succeeds. Early steam engines were heavy and inefficient, consuming大量煤炭. For coal mine owners, coal was cheap, so high energy consumption was acceptable, but for textile factories, such engines were uneconomical. It wasn’t until Watt improved the steam engine, significantly reducing energy consumption, that it could be widely applied in textiles, mining, transportation, and other industries.

AI development must also address cost issues, primarily related to computing power, which in turn depends on energy. Energy has become a critical bottleneck for AI progress. Intelligent agents consume enormous amounts of computing resources; solving cost issues is essential for widespread application. However, subsidies reduce entrepreneurs’ focus on this problem, much like coal mine owners with endless coal, who have no incentive to improve the steam engine.

(Edited by: Wen Jing)