Nick Hatcher’s Post

🚨 Europe Raises Alarm on Global Threats from Digital Platforms, AI, and China 🚨 A recent report from Europe highlights growing concerns about the potential threats posed by digital platforms, AI technologies, and China's influence on the global stage. The report underscores the need for increased scrutiny and regulation to address these challenges and safeguard democratic values, privacy, and national security. Key Takeaways: 👉 Digital Platforms: Europe warns of the risks associated with the dominance of major digital platforms, emphasizing the need for fair competition, transparency, and accountability to protect consumers and promote innovation. 👉 AI Technologies: The report raises concerns about the ethical implications of AI technologies, including data privacy, bias, and autonomous decision-making, calling for responsible AI development and deployment. 👉 China's Influence: Europe highlights China's growing influence in the digital landscape and its potential impact on global governance, cybersecurity, and geopolitical stability, urging vigilance and strategic cooperation among democratic nations. As Europe sounds the alarm on these pressing issues, it underscores the importance of collaborative efforts, informed policymaking, and international cooperation to address the complex challenges posed by digital transformation and geopolitical shifts. It's crucial for stakeholders across sectors to engage in constructive dialogue and collective action to navigate these challenges and shape a digital future that upholds democratic values, fosters innovation, and ensures security and privacy for all. #DigitalPlatforms #AI #China #Europe #Geopolitics #Cybersecurity #Regulation #Policy #DigitalTransformation #Ethics

Monday's Musings: Seven Big Themes In Tech For The Next Presidency https://buff.ly/4fUKmAG Expect Regulations For National Security, But Overall Lighter Regulatory Framework – read @rwang0’s latest insights

As U.S. policymakers increasingly frame tech regulation in terms of a rivalry with China, Kenton Thibaut writes that, absent a more comprehensive strategy, these measures will fail to address systemic national security issues.

It’s a hard-nosed thing to say, but war always fosters innovation. The conflicts in the Middle East and Ukraine certainly are – with the latter seeing in-theatre enhancements to the USA’s alternatives to GPS-based mapping, tracking and targeting systems. The growing use of electronic warfare in contested theatres also means that these alternatives have gained added value to the USA and its allies. As a result, the operational efficacy of Western nations is now more dependent on US technological support than ever before – few, if any, of the US’s allies could conduct successful military operations at scale without at least implicit US support. On the other side of the geopolitical fence, we expect to see the CCP increasingly assert its will over the security apparatus of countries (especially in the ‘global south’) that have accepted Chinese funds at scale. We also anticipate that China will seek to nurture conduit markets through which Chinese interests might be able to access the markets of the USA and its allies after the establishment of firm borders between the emerging cybergeographic blocs. In short, barriers to trade and data flows keep getting built, so people are trying to prepare ways around them… More parochially, the UK’s Government intends to designate large-scale data storage centres as Critical National Infrastructure sites (something the Tories wanted to do, too). Doing so grants HMG the power to access – and, in extremis, assume control of – nearly all large data storage and processing facilities, including those used by Financial Services institutions, healthcare providers and telecoms companies. In principle, there is a strong libertarian argument here, but in practice it is a weak one: without the promise of market access, big tech companies will not provide their services (an immeasurably unpopular option with the public); and without the recourse to access data, HMG will not allow those companies to operate freely in the UK (an equally unpalatable outcome). This bargain, whereby ‘big tech’ companies are given the opportunity to turn a profit in return for the state accessing their data in the name of national security is one that is being struck around the world. Online, privacy is dead.

It’s a hard-nosed thing to say, but war always fosters innovation. The conflicts in the Middle East and Ukraine certainly are – with the latter seeing in-theatre enhancements to the USA’s alternatives to GPS-based mapping, tracking and targeting systems. The growing use of electronic warfare in contested theatres also means that these alternatives have gained added value to the USA and its allies. As a result, the operational efficacy of Western nations is now more dependent on US technological support than ever before – few, if any, of the US’s allies could conduct successful military operations at scale without at least implicit US support. On the other side of the geopolitical fence, we expect to see the CCP increasingly assert its will over the security apparatus of countries (especially in the ‘global south’) that have accepted Chinese funds at scale. We also anticipate that China will seek to nurture conduit markets through which Chinese interests might be able to access the markets of the USA and its allies after the establishment of firm borders between the emerging cybergeographic blocs. In short, barriers to trade and data flows keep getting built, so people are trying to prepare ways around them… More parochially, the UK’s Government intends to designate large-scale data storage centres as Critical National Infrastructure sites (something the Tories wanted to do, too). Doing so grants HMG the power to access – and, in extremis, assume control of – nearly all large data storage and processing facilities, including those used by Financial Services institutions, healthcare providers and telecoms companies. In principle, there is a strong libertarian argument here, but in practice it is a weak one: without the promise of market access, big tech companies will not provide their services (an immeasurably unpopular option with the public); and without the recourse to access data, HMG will not allow those companies to operate freely in the UK (an equally unpalatable outcome). This bargain, whereby ‘big tech’ companies are given the opportunity to turn a profit in return for the state accessing their data in the name of national security is one that is being struck around the world. Online, privacy is dead.

Part 1: Modern Technology and the Issues of Information Monopoly (2024-10-08)

This week in The Spy Hunter newsletter: - Microsoft revises a deal with UAE-based AI firm G42 over the company’s alleged ties to China. The changes follow months of US concern about illicit technology transfers and risks to national security. #microsoft #espionage #geopolitics #china #AI #nationalsecurity https://lnkd.in/gXx-943T

From the article: “U.S. Republican lawmakers are seeking a probe into Microsoft’s MSFT -2.48%decrease; red down pointing triangle $1.5 billion investment in artificial intelligence firm G42, citing concerns about the transfer of advanced technology and possible ties the Abu Dhabi-based company may have with China. Representatives Michael McCaul and John Moolenaar, chairmen of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, respectively, said in a letter to White House national security adviser Jake Sullivan that the deal “deserves continued special scrutiny” as one of the “most consequential investments by a U.S. technology firm in the Middle East in decades.” They said they were concerned by “attempts to move quickly to advance a partnership that involves the unprecedented transfer of highly sensitive, U.S.-origin technology, without Congressional consultation” or clear regulations in place. The letter, released publicly on Thursday, highlighted recent talks between U.A.E. President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan and Chinese President Xi Jinping that Chinese state media said included discussions about cooperation on AI. The lawmakers requested that the National Intelligence Council assess any ties between G42 and China, as well as the risk of transfer of sensitive U.S. technology to China. Microsoft and G42 didn’t immediately reply to requests for comment. The investment, announced in April, included Microsoft President Brad Smith joining the board of G42 and the Abu Dhabi company using Microsoft’s cloud services for its AI applications. The deal, coming at a time Washington and Beijing compete for influence in the Gulf, included an “intergovernmental assurance agreement” that the companies said was developed in consultation with the U.S. and U.A.E. governments to ensure AI security.” #CyberSecurity #AI https://lnkd.in/e7mJY5em

Reuters [excerpt]: Republican lawmakers asked the Biden administration for an intelligence assessment of #Microsoft's $1.5 billion #investment in #UAE-based #artificialintelligence firm G42 over concerns about transfer of sensitive #technology and G42's historic ties to #China. ... The letter is a sign of growing concern about the lack of regulations around the export of sensitive AI models, as fears mount that companies like G42 might share the prized technology with U.S. adversaries like China. "We remain deeply concerned by attempts to move quickly to advance a partnership that involves the unprecedented transfer of highly sensitive, U.S.-origin technology, without congressional consultation or clearly defined regulations in place," the lawmakers said in the letter. They asked for a U.S. assessment of G42's ties to China's Communist Party, military and government before the Microsoft deal advances. They cited a recent visit by UAE President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan to Beijing to discuss, according to Chinese state news agency Xinhua, cooperation in AI. Microsoft said in a statement it was working closely with the U.S. government and "U.S. national security will continue to be a principal priority." The White House National Security Council spokesperson said in a statement that the administration has been in regular dialogue with lawmakers to ensure they are aware of the risks associated with digital infrastructure. "National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan looks forward to continuing this engagement, including with Chair McCaul," the person added. ..CONCERNS ABOUT CHINA A House Select Committee aide told reporters on a phone call on Thursday that based on conversations with Microsoft, the lawmakers expect the U.S. company to export otherwise severely restricted AI semiconductor chips to train models as well as AI model weights. Microsoft President Brad Smith told Reuters in May that the deal with G42 could eventually involve the transfer of sophisticated chips and tools. The Republicans' letter also cited G42's past "#digital #surveillance" work as an area of possible risk. The aide highlighted prior connections between G42 staff and Emirati cybersecurity firm DarkMatter, which was the subject of a 2019 Reuters investigation on its #cyber #espionage activities. The U.S. has had deepening concerns about China's influence in the Middle East and the United Arab Emirates, a longstanding U.S. ally. But G42 said in February it divested its investments in China and was accepting constraints imposed on it by the United States to work with U.S. companies. G42 previously had investments or partnerships in China with TikTok owner ByteDance, vaccine developer Sinopharm and U.S.-blacklisted biotech firm BGO Genomics. #news #business

Human Intuition and Algorithmic Efficiency Must Be Balanced to Imporve Data Governance. Our new paper in one of the top Computer Science Journals provides framework for #riskgovernance in advanced #AI-enabled data systems. In the pursuit of #efficiency and #resilience in data governance, targeted human judgment is not just a valuable component, but an essential one. An effective data governance framework can enhance system #security and resilience (preventing, avoiding, and mitigating misuse), aswell as recovery capacity. Automated decision models can handle much of the former, providing efficiency and robustness. However, human judgment remains necessary to address errors from AI managing large data systems. with Benjamin Trump, Alexander Kott, Kelsey Stoddard, Moshe Vardi, Christopher L. Cummings, Madison Smith, Ph.D., Andrew Strelzoff, Stephanie Galaitsi, Jeff Keisler, Nathaniel D. Bastian https://lnkd.in/eP9aKsGC