Sentiment tracking in the AI regulation conversation can produce a misleading artifact: a positive signal that reflects institutional announcements rather than policy outcomes. The optimism visible this week was real in the sense that the volume of positive framing increased — but it was concentrated around diplomatic events whose connection to enforceable rules is, at best, aspirational. The arguments that define actual AI governance — over liability assignment, disclosure requirements, labor protections, and model oversight — did not shift. A commenter's image of governments watching AI "like a cat watches…