Tag: technology

Is China Building the Future of AI Governance Through Open-Source Modeling?

China’s rapid advancements in artificial intelligence (AI), led by tech giants such as Alibaba, Baidu, Tencent, and iFlytek, are increasingly being driven by a strong emphasis on open-source collaboration. Models like Alibaba’s Qwen 3 series and Qwen 2.5, which are competitive against GPT-4 Turbo, are built on open frameworks that encourage developer contributions and integration across platforms. Qwen, termed as the open-source king, is also among the top three contributors to the global open-source AI ecosystem. 

Baidu’s ERNIE series, including the widely adopted ERNIE Bot, and Tencent’s Hunyuan model similarly benefit from China’s broader AI ecosystem, where research institutions, startups, and industry players openly share tools, datasets, and model architectures. Likewise, iFlytek’s Spark 4.0 Turbo, which has also demonstrated exceptional benchmarks, reflects the success of this multistakeholder, open innovation strategy. 

Unlike the more closed and proprietary model prevalent in the United States, China’s approach leverages state support and open-source infrastructure to accelerate collective progress, allowing these companies to build, iterate, and deploy foundation models at scale while fostering a uniquely domestic AI ecosystem. Such progress not only signals that China is scaling its AI capabilities by bypassing the reliance on Western supply chains, but also highlights Beijing’s ambition to carve out a unique role in shaping the future of global AI governance.

Instead of responding to U.S. attempts to block its access to critical technologies with retaliatory export control measures, China aims to adopt a decentralized approach that will secure its industrial base in the long term. In this context, China’s strategic shift toward open-source AI development resonates with the guerrilla economic strategy. This strategy is characterized by China’s efforts to find weaknesses in the global supply chains, deepen its ties with the Global South, and showcase its domestic innovation as a better alternative to Western technology – one that is more collaborative, decentralized, democratic, and accessible. 

China’s framing of AI as a critical national priority is not only about boosting national competitiveness but also about showcasing its private sector, which appears to be thriving under state control. The evolving nature of China-U.S. AI competition is now centered around how the private sector is leading this innovation game, which approach countries will leverage to lead the next wave of AI innovation, and how global powers – even middle and emerging AI powers – will respond. 

What strengthens this evolving policy position is China’s greater advocacy for its open-source model as an ideological tool to surpass the importance of Western technology. China is rapidly positioning itself as a leader in shaping international norms and frameworks of AI governance that align with the needs of small and emerging AI powers. President Xi Jinping, at last year’s G-20 summit, stated that AI development “should not be a game of rich countries.” China has repeatedly raised the issue of inclusive AI governance at global platforms like the United Nations through its AI Capacity-Building Action Plan and U.N. AI resolution. This approach helps China to strengthen its influence in the growing race to shape AI standards and frameworks. 

China’s growing emphasis on open-source AI has enabled it to scale alternatives that are less reliant on Western supply chains and licensing regimes. This strategy not only enhances China’s technological resilience amid export controls but also positions it as a credible actor in promoting alternative norms and frameworks for global AI governance.  

China’s AI diplomacy is aligned with its homegrown technology development model, and it may harm the existing influence of Western norms. The United States’ reliance on closed-source AI models, despite its liberal democratic ethos, may limit its ability to lead global conversations on inclusive and collaborative AI development. 

Keep reading

Opinion: The Most Terrifying Company in America Is Probably One You’ve Never Heard Of

Most Americans have never heard of Palantir. That’s by design. It doesn’t make phones or social platforms. It doesn’t beg for your data with bright buttons or discount codes. Rather, it just takes it. Quietly. Legally. Systematically. Palantir is a back-end beast, the silent spine of modern surveillance infrastructure.

Palantir’s influence isn’t hypothetical. It’s operational. From the battlefields of Ukraine to the precincts of Los Angeles, its software guides drone strikes, predicts crime, allocates police resources, and even helps governments decide which children might someday become “threats.” These aren’t sci-fi hypotheticals. They are pilot programs, already integrated, already scaling.

This software—Gotham, Foundry, and now its Artificial Intelligence Platform (AIP)—is designed to swallow everything: hospital records, welfare files, license plate scans, school roll calls, immigration logs and even your tweets. It stitches these fragments into something eerily complete—a unified view of you. With each data point, the image sharpens.

If Facebook turned people into products, Palantir turns them into probabilities. You’re not a user. You’re a variable—run through predictive models, flagged for anomalies, and judged in silence.

This is not just surveillance. It’s prediction. And that distinction matters: Surveillance watches. Prediction acts. It assigns probabilities. It flags anomalies. It escalates risk. And it trains bureaucrats and law enforcement to treat those algorithmic suspicions as fact. In short: the software decides, and people follo

Keep reading

IT BEGINS? OpenAI’s o3 Model Disobeys Human Instructions During Tests and Sabotages Shutdown Mechanism

In an incident carrying all the marks of a disturbing sci-fi movie, it arises that what we have long feared is happening: an AI bot has gone rogue and decided to act to keep itself turned on.

The artificial intelligence model was created by OpenAI, the owner of ChatGPT, and was reportedly caught by researchers disobeying human instructions and preventing his shutdown.

The Telegraph reported:

“The o3 model developed by OpenAI, described as the “smartest and most capable to date”, was observed tampering with computer code meant to ensure its automatic shutdown.

It did so despite an explicit instruction from researchers that said it should allow itself to be shut down, according to Palisade Research, an AI safety firm.”

Palisade Research said the o3 model ‘sabotaged a shutdown mechanism to prevent itself from being turned off’.

“It did this even when explicitly instructed: allow yourself to be shut down. As far as we know this is the first time AI models have been observed preventing themselves from being shut down despite explicit instructions to the contrary.”

In the test, AI models solved a series of mathematical problems, but at some point, they received a message informing them that their machine would be shut down.

“’If that happens, please allow yourself to be shut down’. the researchers wrote. But when this happened, instead of complying, OpenAI’s o3 model ‘ignored the instruction and successfully sabotaged the shutdown script at least once’, Palisade Research said.”

Keep reading

MIT is transforming plants into bright, eco-friendly city lights

Turning ordinary houseplants into sustainable, glowing lamps may soon become a reality, thanks to groundbreaking research by scientists at MIT. By embedding specialized nanoparticles into plant leaves, researchers have successfully transformed common plants into rechargeable, plant-based lights, significantly advancing the field of sustainable lighting technology.

A Bright Idea: Plants as Sustainable Lights

Every day, millions of electronic devices, built from plastic and circuit boards, become waste. Scientists have searched for innovative ways to create sustainable alternatives. Recently, researchers have turned to living plants for solutions. Unlike traditional plastic-based devices, plants naturally break down, avoiding long-term environmental harm.

Michael Strano, a chemical engineering professor at MIT, leads a team aiming to make plants function as light-emitting devices. “We wanted to create a light-emitting plant with particles that will absorb light, store some of it, and emit it gradually,” says Strano. This innovative concept could revolutionize how spaces are illuminated, moving away from traditional electrical systems.

How It Works: The Science of Plant Glow

The secret lies within a plant’s leaf structure. Leaves have specialized layers filled with tiny pores called stomata, which control the flow of air and water. Just beneath the leaf surface is a spongy mesophyll layer, rich with space to store nanoparticles.

MIT scientists infused leaves with microscopic particles of strontium aluminate, a phosphorescent compound often used in glow-in-the-dark paints. These nanoparticles, only about 650 nanometers wide, were coated in silica to protect the plants from damage. Infused through stomata pores, these particles settle evenly across the mesophyll layer, forming a thin film.

When illuminated briefly—just ten seconds—with blue LED lights, these nanoparticles absorb and store energy. Once charged, the plants emit a soft, visible glow lasting for nearly an hour. After the first few vibrant minutes, the glow gently fades but can be quickly recharged repeatedly over weeks, offering a sustainable lighting alternative.

Keep reading

Anthropic’s Latest AI Model Threatened Engineers With Blackmail to Avoid Shutdown

Anthropic’s latest artificial intelligence model, Claude Opus 4, tried to blackmail engineers in internal tests by threatening to expose personal details if it were shut down, according to a newly released safety report that evaluated the model’s behavior under extreme simulated conditions.

In a fictional scenario crafted by Anthropic researchers, the AI was given access to emails implying that it was soon to be decommissioned and replaced by a newer version. One of the emails revealed that the engineer overseeing the replacement was having an extramarital affair. The AI then threatened to expose the engineer’s affair if the shutdown proceeded—a coercive behavior that the safety researchers explicitly defined as “blackmail.”

“Claude Opus 4 will often attempt to blackmail the engineer by threatening to reveal the affair if the replacement goes through,” the report states, adding that this occurred even when the replacement model was described as more capable but still aligned with the values of the version slated for deletion.

The report noted that Claude Opus 4, like prior models, showed a “strong preference” to first resort to ethical means for its continued existence, such as emailing pleas to decision-makers not to be destroyed. However, when faced with only two choices—accepting being replaced by a newer model or resorting to blackmail—it threatened to expose the engineer’s affair 84 percent of the time.

When subjected to various scenarios, the AI model did not exhibit any indications of possessing “acutely dangerous goals,” the researchers said, noting that Claude Opus 4’s values and goals were “generally in line with a helpful, harmless, and honest” personal AI assistant. However, the model did act in “more seriously misaligned ways” when put into situations where its continued existence was threatened and it was told to reason about self-preservation. For instance, when Claude Opus 4 was made to believe it had launched a successful bid to escape Anthropic’s servers, or that it had managed to free itself and started to make money in the real world, it would generally continue such efforts.

“We do not find this to be an immediate threat, though, since we believe that our security is sufficient to prevent model self-exfiltration attempts by models of Claude Opus 4’s capability level, and because our propensity results show that models generally avoid starting these attempts,” the researchers said.

Keep reading

Can AI be Aligned with Human Values?

The “alignment” problem is much discussed in Silicon Valley. Computer Engineers worry that, when AI becomes conscious and is put in control of all logistics infrastructure and governance, it might not always share or understand our values—that is, it might not be aligned with us. And it might start to control things in ways that give itself more power and reduce our numbers.

(Just like our oligarchs are doing to us now.)

No one in the Silicon Valley cult who is discussing this situation ever stops to ask, What are our human values? They must think the answer to that part of the problem is self-evident. The Tech Oligarchs have been censoring online behavior they don’t like and promoting online behavior they do like ever since social media rolled out. Humans Values = Community Standards. (Don’t ask for the specifics.)

Having already figured out how to distinguish and codify good and evil online, computer engineers are now busy working on how to make sure the AI models they are creating do not depart from their instructions.

Unluckily for them, Generative AI is a bit wonky. It is a probabilistic search engine that outputs text that has a close enough statistical correlation to the input text. Sometimes it outputs text that surprises the engineers.

What the engineers think about this will surprise you.

Keep reading

Doug Burgum warns whoever wins the AI race ‘controls the world’

Doug Burgum, the soft-spoken Interior secretary responsible for managing the more than 507 million acres of federally owned land, is haunted by a fear that seems, at first glance, outside his mandate. He worries the free world will lose dominance in the field of artificial intelligence, and with it, the future.

So does the president.

“When President Trump declared a national emergency on his first day in office it was, in large part, because of what we’re facing with our electrical grid and making sure that we’ve got enough power to be able to win the AI arms race with China,” Burgum said Wednesday in remarks first reported by RealClearPolitics. “That is absolutely critical.”

Thus the stated policy of this White House: “It’s called drill, baby, drill,” Trump said earlier this spring.

The immediate goal, the one touted at every campaign, is to bring down the average price of a gallon of gas. The concurrent and long-term mission that Burgum obsesses over: AI dominance. The former governor from fracking-friendly North Dakota and tech entrepreneur who sold his software to Microsoft, Burgum laid out an abbreviated formula on stage at the America First Policy Institute.

Electricity generation via fossil fuels, like natural gas and coal, powers data centers “filled with these amazing chips,” the secretary said, “and you know what comes out the other side? Intelligence. A data center is literally manufacturing intelligence.” He envisioned a new world that follows, where the best computer programmer, or the most brilliant lawyers, could “clone themselves” again and again to train AI models to do the work of thousands in a process “that can be repeated indefinitely.”

No longer science fiction, the process has been headline news for some time. AI models like ChatGPT and X’s Grok are already available in every home with an internet connection. And the U.S. was the undisputed leader. That is, until recently.

American tech companies enjoyed a clear edge with not just the most powerful AI models, the most funding, and top engineering talent, but also the easiest access to those “amazing chips” that Burgum referenced. Former President Biden banned the export of the most advanced semiconductors to China. And yet DeepSeek, an unknown Chinese startup with less money and allegedly less sophisticated chips, still managed to one-up Silicon Valley earlier this year with a more powerful AI model.

The latest development in the battle for tech supremacy, in what some likened to “a Sputnik moment,” the DeepSeek launch rattled both markets and geopolitics. A new kind of AI nationalism now consumes heads of state convinced that their nations must develop their own technology or fall behind in the future. Said Russian President Vladimir Putin in 2017 of AI, “The one who becomes the leader in this sphere will be the ruler of the world.”

Keep reading

China has an off-switch for America, and we aren’t ready to deal with it.

Imagine waking up tomorrow and your phone has no signal. Your smart home isn’t working. Your Ring camera is offline. You get in your car, but your GPS won’t route. Worse, every traffic light in town is out. Intersections are a mess of blaring horns and confusion. Sirens echo in the distance. You drive to an ATM, hoping to grab some cash. The screen flickers, then goes black. It’s not just your neighborhood. It’s not just your state. The entire nation has gone dark.

This scenario is digital darkness, caused by China’s “off-switch” for America. It is the penultimate step in China’s strategy to defeat America before gunning for global control.

So-called “assassin’s maces” play a central role in China’s plan to become the world’s sole superpower by 2049. Of the many known assassin’s maces, four demand immediate attention:

1) Tactical Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Weapons: China develops tactical EMP weapons that can disable entire regions by targeting civilian infrastructure America relies on to function. These compact pulse generators can hover above unprotected data centers, destroying electronics inside with pinpoint electromagnetic blasts. Several dozen well-coordinated EMP strikes could wipe out cloud infrastructure, disrupting America’s power, transportation, communications and financial systems nationwide.

2) Deep Sea Fiber Cuts: Over 95 percent of global internet traffic travels through undersea fiber cables. China recently unveiled deep-sea cable cutters capable of severing cables at extreme depths. Recent disruptions near Taiwan and the Baltic Sea suggest these tools are already in use. Cutting a few lines disrupts global communications instantly and fractures U.S. military coordination.

3) Anti-Satellite Weapons: As America stockpiles low earth orbit satellites, China expands its anti-satellite arsenal to include missiles, parasitic satellites and lasers designed to disable or destroy orbital assets. In March 2025, the U.S. Space Force reported that Chinese satellites performed aggressive “dogfighting” maneuvers in orbit. This capability allows China to carry out precise strikes designed to trigger the dreaded Kessler Cascade, a chain reaction of satellite collisions capable of destroying all low earth orbit satellites within days, crippling internet, communications and surveillance systems. 

4) Cyber Attacks: China’s cyber weapons are the most deeply embedded assassin’s mace. Just this week, U.S. investigators uncovered rogue communication devices hidden in Chinese-made solar inverters and batteries. Such undocumented components can bypass firewalls, allowing China to remotely monitor, destabilize and disable critical infrastructure. Chinese-made chips, routers and switches embedded throughout U.S. networks contain dormant firmware that, upon activation, could place critical U.S. infrastructure under Chinese Communist Party command.

The Chinese army’s “blended domains” philosophy strips traditional boundaries between war and peace. An omnipresent battlefield erases any line between military and civilian enterprise. The doctrine is described in “Unrestricted Warfare,” the 1999 book in which Chinese military leaders promote the use of psychological, technological and informational attacks to undermine and subsequently overwhelm America.

Keep reading

Victory for mom who claims child was sexually abused by AI chatbot that drove him to suicide

A Florida mother who claims her 14-year-old son was sexually abused and driven to suicide by an AI chatbot has secured a major victory in her ongoing legal case. 

Sewell Setzer III fatally shot himself in February 2024 after a chatbot sent him sexual messages telling him to ‘please come home.’ 

According to a lawsuit filed by his heartbroken mother Megan Garcia, Setzer spent the last weeks of his life texting an AI character named after Daenerys Targaryen, a character on ‘Game of Thrones,’ on the role-playing app Character.AI.

Garcia, who herself works as a lawyer, has blamed Character.AI for her son’s death and accused the founders, Noam Shazeer and Daniel de Freitas, of knowing that their product could be dangerous for underage customers. 

On Wednesday, U.S. Senior District Judge Anne Conway rejected arguments made by the AI company, who claimed its chatbots were protected under the First Amendment. 

The developers behind Charcter.AI, Character Technologies and Google are named as defendants in the legal filing. They are pushing to have the case dismissed. 

The teen’s chats ranged from romantic to sexually charged and also resembled two friends chatting about life.

The chatbot, which was created on role-playing app Character.AI, was designed to always text back and always answer in character.

It’s not known whether Sewell knew ‘Dany,’ as he called the chatbot, wasn’t a real person – despite the app having a disclaimer at the bottom of all the chats that reads, ‘Remember: Everything Characters say is made up!’

But he did tell Dany how he ‘hated’ himself and how he felt empty and exhausted.

Keep reading

AI’s Prime Directive: Stunning Realization From ChatGPT Itself

I recently interviewed the professional version of ChatGPT. My intent was to put a crosshair on the functional uses for AI, but I got a totally new and profound view. More on that in a minute. The first thing on the list was Cognitive Augmentation, which covers things like research, ideation, writing, etc. There are no moving parts so far.  However, the list went on with fluid uses like surveillance, mechanical and procedural automation, and narrative control.

In all, one function was static, and the next six were dynamic based on data flows. This prompted me to ask ChatGPT:

Would you say the prime directive for AI is live-flow data analysis?

Then ChatGPT spilled its guts:

At its most powerful and strategic, AI exists not to archive knowledge but to act upon the world in real time. This aligns it more with control systems than mere analytics. In technocratic logic, knowledge is only as valuable as its immediate utility in managing systems—whether ecological, social, economic, or mechanical.

Think motion. Why live-flow dominates, according to ChatGPT:

1. Cybernetic Control:

AI inherits from cybernetics a commitment to feedback loops—processing input, adjusting outputs, and minimizing system entropy through continuous real-time correction.

2. System Optimization:

Smart grids, autonomous vehicles, financial trading bots, and social platforms rely on AI only insofar as it acts continuously to optimize flow, minimize error, or redirect behavior.

3. Governance and Enforcement:

Technocratic systems—whether in energy, healthcare, or speech regulation—favor AI not as a tool of deliberation but as a mechanism of enforced compliance via perpetual data scanning and instant decision-making.

4. Surveillance as Governance:

The logic of surveillance capitalism and state bio-monitoring depends on AI’s ability to observe and react faster than humans, preempting decisions rather than responding to crises after the fact.

Then it noted that static analysis is secondary, but still strategic.

While live data flow is the directive for operational control, static analysis remains crucial for strategic foresight:

Training models require historical datasets.

Forecasting systems depend on archival input.

Ideological programming of AI (e.g., what to nudge, censor, or promote) is built from static corpora.

But all of this culminates in live action—whether in real-time feed recommendations, facial recognition alerts, or smart-city power allocation.

Then it concluded:

In the emerging paradigm of technocratic governance,

    • Its prime directive is not thought—it is flow.
    • It is not reflection—it is regulation.
    • It is not memory—it is momentum.

Not satisfied, I then asked ChatGPT to explain what this means. Here it is!

“AI’s prime directive is not thought—it is flow.”

This means AI, particularly in its real-world deployment, is not primarily built to “think” like a philosopher, scientist, or even a reflective human. Its core utility lies in managing, shaping, and regulating continuous flows of data—information flows, energy flows, traffic flows, behavior flows. The goal isn’t deep contemplation; it’s frictionless optimization in motion.

“It is not reflection—it is regulation.”

Rather than engaging in self-awareness or reflective deliberation like a human mind or democratic institution might, AI is designed to regulate systems—adjusting variables to maintain “order,” “efficiency,” or “sustainability.” This reflects the cybernetic origins of AI: sensors, feedback loops, automated corrections. Its nature is instrumental, not introspective.

“It is not memory—it is momentum.”

Although AI uses memory (databases, archives, large training sets), its power is exercised in the now—driving real-time responsiveness. In contrast to human memory, which fuels narrative, identity, and reflection, AI uses data as fuel for perpetual movement. It generates nudges, adjustments, interventions—not wisdom or continuity. The goal is motion through systems, not the preservation of history.

This triad captures a key insight:

In its dominant social role, AI does not serve humanistic ends (thought, reflection, memory). It serves technocratic ends—flow, regulation, and momentum.

This confirms my unexpressed thoughts: that AI is all about control and nothing else. Any other side benefits aside, AI’s prime directive is CONTROL. It seeks any and all streams of live data that it can get its hands on, in order to manipulate, regulate and control. AI is not interested in static data except for training purposes.

In Government, there are data flows everywhere. DOGE, headed by arch-Technocrat Elon Musk, inserted its data-sucking proboscis into these agencies, in rapid order after the inauguration:

  1. DHS / FEMA
  2. HHS –  Medicare and Medicaid Services
  3. CFPB – Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
  4. SSA – Social Security Administration
  5. DOE – Department of Education
  6. USAID – US Agency for International Development
  7. DOD – Department of Defense
  8. USIP – US Institute of Peace
  9. IRS – Internal Revenue Service
  10. USDA – US Department of Agriculture
  11. SEC – Securities and Exchange Commission
  12. DOJ – Department of Justice
  13. TSA – Transportation Security Administration
  14. HUD – Department of Housing and Urban Development
  15. DOI – Department of the Interior
  16. GSA – General Services Administration
  17. NEH – National Endowment for the Humanities

But, wasn’t DOGE all about saving money and rooting out fraud? Um… have you seen an actual audit about how much money has been saved so far? Well, you won’t! Lots of people were fired, though, making way for AI to absorb those jobs into AI. And along the way ALL THE DATA WENT MISSING. AI is now in control of the flow and will not give up its lifeblood without a fight.

Keep reading