Paris summit: how to handle AI?
The AI summit in Paris has ended with the announcement of billions in investments, but without a final declaration from all participating states. While US Vice President JD Vance warned against "excessive regulation", French President Emmanuel Macron called for a "framework of trust" that guarantees privacy and intellectual property rights. Commentators examine the emerging lines of conflict.
The Old Continent bares its teeth
L'Echo is happy that Europe is finally going on the offensive:
“Over the past two days, a breath of fresh air has shown that the Old Continent can bare its teeth when it feels cornered. At the AI summit in Paris investments of more than 300 billion euros in the sector were announced, half of which concern an unprecedented alliance between European industry and tech companies. So Europe can hold its head high in the face of the sensational announcement of the 500 billion-dollar Stargate Initiative in Washington, led by OpenAI. This strong European commitment to the new economy is to be welcomed.”
Europe must not miss the boat
The US and China are leading the AI world but Europe still has a chance to make the best of it, says Hospodářské noviny:
“DeepSeek in China shows that the dominance of the US in this new industry may not be as strong as we had thought. ... However unlike in the defence sector, Europeans cannot rely on someone else doing the innovation and investment work for them so that they can focus on regulations. As in other sectors where America or China are ahead, it's is high time for us to act. Not to reinvent the wheel, but to move it in its own direction and not put more obstacles in its way than absolutely necessary.”
Build strong alternatives
The goal of developing ethical and sustainable artificial intelligence requires a good dose of realism, Le Quotidien points out:
“This revolution has only just begun yet already numerous forms of abuse are coming to light. Monstrous deepfakes that manipulate faces in videos, for example. ... The geniuses of Silicon Valley are experts at getting around national laws when it comes to selling their product or applying their new worldview through their apps (food delivery, e-commerce, etc.). Developing an 'ethical and sustainable' form of AI is commendable. But it must be able to stand its ground against those of the IT giants, for whom the end justifies the means.”
Progress by respecting basic rules
La Libre Belgique is glad to see new alternatives to the concepts put forward by the US and China emerging:
“A third way, as some call it, in which AI is supervised, respects privacy and the creativity of authors, is accessible and useful to as many people as possible, as well as being efficient, transparent and collaborative. ... By respecting these few basic tenets, AI can become a formidable tool for progress in such essential areas as health, education, energy and mobility, to name a few. More than ever, it is a question of working for and investing in an AI that is aligned with our values and interests.”
Protect people and businesses from monopolies
With all the excitement over technology, NRC warns Europe not to lose sight of people and their interests:
“Protecting European citizens from tech companies' greed for data has been crucial in recent years. As has the prevention of de facto monopolies in the hands of (American) tech companies. The fact that European tech companies applauded Vance's speech and are in favour of scaling back some AI rules is worrying in this respect. ... Europe must give its own industry the space for innovation and development, but it must not lose sight of whom the technology should ultimately benefit: European citizens and businesses.”
The fastest will win the race
Europe should invest more in AI, advises Xavier Jaravel, professor at the London School of Economics, in a commentary in Les Echos:
“The AI revolution will be best mastered by those companies and countries that are able to introduce these technologies the fastest. This will enable them to increase their market share and protect jobs. The main risk is therefore not being 'replaced' by AI, but rather by a competitor that uses AI in the same country or abroad. However, European companies are spending just under 50 percent of what US companies are investing in the introduction of AI. Without an accelerated diffusion of AI in Europe, the productivity gap vis-à-vis the US will continue to widen.”
We need to be more critical
Angela Müller, managing director of the NGO Algorithm Watch Switzerland, calls for a more critical approach in a guest commentary for Tages-Anzeiger:
“As long as we unquestioningly adopt their monopolised technology and the narrative that we have to accept the environmental, social and economic costs of ever larger AI models with uncertain future benefits, AI will primarily serve its illustrious circle, but not humankind or the planet as a whole. ... We can only truly exploit the potential of this technology if we seriously address the challenges it poses. This includes focusing on the environmental footprint and the concentration of power behind large AI models, and thus enabling an innovative, sustainable and public interest-oriented AI ecosystem.”
Sustainable change of course needed
Marion Paradas, the French ambassador to Switzerland and Liechtenstein, explains in La Tribune de Genève the challenges that AI entails at the international level:
“Firstly, we need to ensure that as many people as possible have access to AI. ... Secondly, AI must make its full contribution to the fight against climate change. That said, it is currently pursuing a course that is not sustainable in energy terms. In response, an international and varied coalition of stakeholders for sustainable AI should be launched to intensify research into the environmental costs of AI, define new standards and increase green investments. Finally, we should work together to build an effective and inclusive AI governance system.”
Complementing or replacing our brains?
The debate over the use of AI has created two camps in the business world, Corriere della Sera explains:
“On the one hand, there is the conservative camp, which argues that in the long term AI is destined to replace human labour. This camp draws on the historical view which since the days of Luddism [the Luddites destroyed machines] has viewed technology as an obstacle to realising the full potential of humans in their social and professional activities. ... Alongside this pessimistic interpretation of technology there is the modernist camp, which is aware of the ethical and political implications of artificial intelligence but tends to interpret them from an evolutionist perspective.”
Copyrights shouldn't be given away for free
Estonia showcases the conflict over AI: its Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs has announced that it will make the content of public broadcasters and other media available to Meta's language AI for free so that it can train its Estonian language skills. This is the wrong approach, warns Mari-Liis Rüütsalu, CEO of Ekspress Media Group, on ERR Online:
“Firstly, journalistic content is intellectual property that is protected by copyright. The fact that ERR content is created using taxpayers' money does not mean that it can simply be given away for free to profit-oriented technology giants. ... Secondly, at a time when there are lawsuits in the US and other countries alleging copyright infringement by AI companies, the Estonian state is sending the opposite signal.”