Chinese artificial intelligence (AI) start-up DeepSeek early this year launched a new model to much fanfare internationally, but the company’s technological breakthroughs did not come from independent research and development, they relied on the technological achievements accumulated by the US and other Western countries.
As early as 2017, the Chinese government proposed a plan for a “new generation of AI,” with the goal of becoming a global leader in the technology by 2030. This is not only about tech competition, but also an important step for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to achieve “digital totalitarianism.”
Chinese companies use AI to monitor the nation’s people and bolster censorship at home. They promote Chinese-made AI technology abroad through large-scale subsidies and low bidding, coercing developing countries into dependence on Chinese technology and expanding the CCP’s digital authoritarian influence.
Last year, the CCP proposed a global AI governance initiative to promote its censorship system and surveillance technology internationally in the name of “responsible AI,” which is tantamount to asking the world to accept an AI version of its social credit system.
Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Guo Jiakun (郭嘉昆) has said that China is willing to cooperate with other countries to develop AI and help developing countries benefit from “the intelligence dividend,” but such support often comes with control over data and monopoly of infrastructure.
Under Beijing’s Digital Silk Road initiative, Chinese companies provide AI technology and surveillance systems in Africa and Southeast Asia, but transmit local data back to China and use technical barriers to tie the countries into China’s digital ecosystem, endangering national security and tying recipient countries to Beijing.
Nations should be wary of China’s use of AI technology to expand its authoritarian influence. They should bolster protections of intellectual property to prevent technological innovators from being defeated by China’s theft and subsidy strategies.
Ryan Xu is a freelancer.
Translated by Lin Lee-kai
The first Donald Trump term was a boon for Taiwan. The administration regularized the arms sales process and enhanced bilateral ties. Taipei will not be so fortunate the second time around. Given recent events, Taiwan must proceed with the assumption that it cannot count on the United States to defend it — diplomatically or militarily — during the next four years. Early indications suggested otherwise. The nomination of Marco Rubio as US Secretary of State and the appointment of Mike Waltz as the national security advisor, both of whom have expressed full-throated support for Taiwan in the past, raised hopes that
There is nothing the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) could do to stop the tsunami-like mass recall campaign. KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) reportedly said the party does not exclude the option of conditionally proposing a no-confidence vote against the premier, which the party later denied. Did an “actuary” like Chu finally come around to thinking it should get tough with the ruling party? The KMT says the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is leading a minority government with only a 40 percent share of the vote. It has said that the DPP is out of touch with the electorate, has proposed a bloated
In an eloquently written piece published on Sunday, French-Taiwanese education and policy consultant Ninon Godefroy presents an interesting take on the Taiwanese character, as viewed from the eyes of an — at least partial — outsider. She muses that the non-assuming and quiet efficiency of a particularly Taiwanese approach to life and work is behind the global success stories of two very different Taiwanese institutions: Din Tai Fung and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC). Godefroy said that it is this “humble” approach that endears the nation to visitors, over and above any big ticket attractions that other countries may have
A media report has suggested that Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) was considering initiating a vote of no confidence in Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) in a bid to “bring down the Cabinet.” The KMT has denied that this topic was ever discussed. Why might such a move have even be considered? It would have been absurd if it had seen the light of day — potentially leading to a mass loss of legislative seats for the KMT even without the recall petitions already under way. Today the second phase of the recall movement is to begin — which has
RSS