The technical deal, which costs 31 billion pounds with the United States, may seem great – but the government should answer these questions | Davis died
PEter Kyle, even two weeks ago, was that the Secretary of Technology once warned that technology companies such as Meta, Google and Microsoft were so strong that the UK needed to deal with it with it “A sense of the second” and “humility”And the treatment of negotiations with them similar to diplomacy among nations. This vision fades in the form The Technology prosperity agreement in the United Kingdom Hit this week. Although this new bilateral partnership is officially, it seems that this deal aims to facilitate investment from American technology companies instead of promoting cooperation on goals such as artificial intelligence safety and protecting publishing rights for British rights holders or digital service tax.
The logical basis is clear: American companies Standing alone At the top of the AI Global Value Series, which makes the country a clear partner for the UK government seeks to do so “TurbidAmnesty International. Against the difficult economic background, promise “31 billion pounds joint £” In support of Amnesty International Infrastructure in the United Kingdom Like Datacentres offers welcome addresses.
However, potential challenges are also clear. We know that the audience Ports fears On the motive of these companies and Increase With the British state. They may have reasonable questions about this deal, too: especially the Quid Pro Quo, which comes with the investment of Big Tech. The companies that take these pledges are not a charity, and it is still unclear, what are the local communities AreasIn Nurutberland, you will see in exchange for providing land and network capacity.
In the United States itself, the developments of the data center High energy bills and Bald water supply While supporting Some jobs significantly. It is not surprising, then, that the current plans for the new “Easter” data center in Buckinghamshire Local opposition And legal decline. To ensure that the new “artificial intelligence growth areas” do not suffer from similar controversy, the government will need to provide assurances that energy resources and other amazing assets for private investment will lead to returns for local economies – and to the public portfolio – instead of achieving profits abroad.
Then there is the cost of the alternative opportunity associated with setting the priorities of American technology on local alternatives. Liz Kendall, Khalifa Kyle Kyle, Minister of Technology, Description of the new partnership As “a vote of confidence in the prosperous artificial intelligence sector in Britain,” although few companies concerned – not to mention the owned – in Britain. Investing from American companies does not need to be zero, but without a skilled management, it risk clarifying any green buds for growth in the technology sector in the UK. The firm dependence on American technologies in the most profitable parts of the artificial intelligence chain will leave UK companies to fight on food residue.
It is true that the United Kingdom lacks the size and advantages of resources for the United States, and therefore the ability to participate in developing advanced artificial intelligence on its own: from this perspective, American investment is necessary. However, our international peers – from the European Union “Eurostak“The Louise Movement in Brazil Lula da Silva-drawn alternative paths to support sovereign capabilities and create conditions for local technology companies and small and medium-sized institutions and Really general alternatives To flourish.
All this is in the direction of the most important issue: What is the government’s vision of Amnesty International along with doing so bigger and faster? Often there is an implicit assumption that artificial intelligence will be a social and economic transformative, With the suggestion of that “Millions of patients can receive life -saving treatments faster” and only the most recent in a series of unlimited and bad claims. The sub -text is that the land promised on the horizon – but only the investments and organizational changes required by large technology companies will reach us there. However, this is exactly backward: politics must instead consider what the artificial intelligence of people and society can achieve, and from there he asks about the necessary technological investments.
When the question is asked in this way, the answers appear less to expand the profit margins for the largest current companies. There may be, for example, a great general value that must be clicked The previous generation Basic models, which are much less expensive to buy and operate. success Dibsic in China It shows the possibility that the UK is a “quick follow -up” model as instead of begging to get scraps from the Big Tech table, we wait and see what innovations will lead to the maximum value, and follow -up effective ways to do this ourselves.
Achieving this will include the use of false public resources to identify artificial intelligence research and build independent capabilities. The good news of our new state minister is that the seeds of this agenda are already present. the government The sovereign intelligence unit It can be assigned to support alternative research models. Public account resources and data resources such as artificial intelligence resources and the new national data library can be implemented Access policies Which prefers smaller organizations, public entities and non -profit organizations. To ensure that there are no general benefits in large technology, measures can also be taken to reduce the talents of intellectual property and the disposal of intellectual property Predicon partnershipsWith strong Organizational work Encouraged when necessary.
After promoting the newsletter
None of this means that the government should abandon cooperation with the United States, or with American technology companies. But warning tales from all over the world abound in the fact that bliss – and sincere – has appealed to the common goodness has worked to ensure large technology profits. Preventing this occurrence will require an accurate vision and design, and yes, statecraft: It is not explained as respect but as a skill and Guile required to present the national interest.