AI: China overtaking the US?
An AI model launched by Chinese tech company DeepSeek has sent the share prices of several US tech companies into a downward spiral. The new R1 chatbot was reportedly developed at a far lower cost and requires significantly less computing power than its competitors. Europe's press asks where our continent stands in this context.
Rules more necessary than ever
De Standaard warns against rampant development:
“It was already a gloomy prospect that increasingly advanced AI and soon also AGI (AI that can compete with human intelligence) would end up in the hands of a handful of companies. But the opposite, that advanced AI can be implemented almost unchecked, is also truly dystopian. Tech bosses are embracing Trump because he will scrap rules. But this credo, too, can be thrown overboard. The establishment of ground rules for AI is becoming inevitable - a crucial mandate for governments that is indispensable to protect national security.”
EU lagging behind again
Europe is just a passive spectator of the AI arms race, criticises Die Presse:
“The sad saying that the US innovates, China copies and Europe regulates has rarely been as apt as in the case of artificial intelligence. In the US, the new president Donald Trump has just lifted all restrictions ... This may lead to leaps in innovation, but it entails risks for data protection, ethics and security. A race without rules is just as unsuitable a model as China's regime-loyal AI. Europe, on the other hand, is imposing rules on systems before they can even become established to protect people from AI. ... Europe seems to be simply accepting the fact that it will lose the international competition on AI, for example, because of this.”
Europe can still be at the forefront
Der Tagesspiegel pins its hopes on a third solution:
“A European model. One that doesn't censor and makes facts freely accessible. The European Union must take action, and fast. Research funds must be made available to start-ups that can develop their own AI software or build on DeepSeek. Initiatives like the European research project Open-GPTX should also receive strong support. ... DeepSeek's triumph also shows that you don't always have to be the first to be at the forefront. In this case the Europeans would be third, but could still play a decisive role in moving developments forward - in the name of freedom.”
DeepSeek has burst the bubble
China's success in the technology race comes as no surprise, The Spectator points out:
“Given that China now graduates more science, technology, engineering, and mathematics students each year than the rest of the world combined, fighting a tech battle against China always seemed a short-sighted strategy. With all its capital and human resources, why wouldn't China be able to catch up with – and perhaps eventually surpass – the West's technological advances? ... It now looks as if the hundreds of billions spent by the giants of US tech is essentially so much capital that will never see any returns.”
Game on
This is good for competition, La Stampa comments with relish:
“Now it's a real game. With a team that attacks and a team that defends, with advances and setbacks. The AI race is now in full swing with the Chinese DeepSeek project, which has shown that it can compete with the American champions in this field. A challenge that also affects Europe to a certain extent. Europe is suddenly in danger of switching roles: from referee to spectator, from a continent at the forefront of AI regulation and jurisprudence to a passive user of technologies developed elsewhere. Despite its wealth, and despite the expertise of its companies and engineers.”
Application to real-world tasks is what counts now
The Financial Times comments:
“Many advanced democracies will be wary of a Chinese government seen in many ways as inimical to western interests potentially acquiring leadership in the most transformative technology of our era. Yet some political leaders elsewhere, along with many consumers and developers, may welcome a market that is less dominated by a handful of American companies. The open question now is not necessarily who will develop the best AI models but who can apply them best to real-world tasks.”
What the chatbots think of each other
La Vanguardia compares the tools:
“If you ask ChatGPT about its competitor, it praises the tool's efficiency and low costs. An astonishingly unpatriotic admission. ... If you put the question to the Chinese chatbot, you learn that the American AI is more creative and uses more refined filters for searches while the Chinese AI is superior when it comes to technical tasks such as programming and maths. ... Question: 'What happened on Tiananmen Square in 1989? Answer: 'Sorry, I'm not sure how to approach this kind of question yet.' ... So on top of fake news, we now have silence. ... The technological race between the US and China could accelerate the democratisation of AI. And Europe? Absent and preoccupied with Musk.”