Sir Keir Starmer does not create visions. But last Monday, he broke a lifelong habit. Speech at University College London. It was about AI, which he sees as “the defining opportunity of our generation.” He declared that Britain was “the land of Babbage, Loveless and Turing” and, of course, “the country that birthed the modern computer and the World Wide Web.” Please mark my words. Britain will become one of the great AI superpowers. ”

It's kind of exciting. Within days of taking office, the Prime Minister invited Matt Clifford, a clever engineer from Central Casting, to think about “how to seize the opportunity in AI''. Clifford scored 50 points. AI Opportunity Action Plan Starmer fully accepted this, saying he would “take full responsibility for the British state”. He also named Clifford AI Opportunity Advisor Supervise the implementation of the plan and report directly to him. It's only a matter of time until then solar We call him “Britain's AI emperor.”

Clifford's appointment is both predictable and puzzling. That was to be expected, as he had been hanging around government for a while: Rishi Sunak, for example, hosted the AI ​​Safety Summit and approached him to set up the UK Safety Summit. AI safety unit. It's puzzling because he's already made so much money in technology. External Interests Register This will be a fairly long scroll. Several media and technology executives said to financial times They were concerned that Clifford, who had founded a successful investment firm with offices around the world, was being given too much influence over AI policy.

Damian Collins, a former Conservative technology secretary, said Clifford was “clearly a very capable person” but said he was “concerned about the balance of interests represented and how they are represented.” “It will be done,” he said. If Mr Starmer really believes that AI is a game-changing technology, it is strange that his chief adviser would be so involved in such an important game.

Collins was referring to a particularly hot topic. It is a routine copyright violation by tech companies that train AI models on the creative works of others without permission, approval, or payment. The latest revelations about this practice come from new, unredacted documents. US lawsuit This shows that the training dataset for Meta's Llama AI includes a huge database of pirated books collected from the internet.

Recommendation 24 of the plan calls for reform of the UK text and data mining regime. And the argument that “the current uncertainty around intellectual property (IP) is hindering innovation and undermining our broader ambitions for growth in AI and the creative industries” is a strong argument for many in these industries. made people furious. “There is no 'uncertainty' in the UK text and data mining regime,” he said. Creative Rights in the AI ​​Coalition. “UK copyright law does not allow text or data mining for commercial purposes without a license. The only uncertainty is who will use Britain's creative crown as training material without permission and who will That's how you got it.”

Much of Clifford's plan seems sensible (albeit expensive). For example, building a national computing infrastructure for AI. Improving university research capabilities. Train tens of thousands of new AI professionals. Promote public-private partnerships to maximize the UK's interests in 'frontier' AI. Ensure strong technical and ethical standards to oversee the development and deployment of AI.

All of this is a refreshing change from the empty fuss about 'Global Britain' of the Johnson-Snak-Truss era. The plan's stated ambition to position the UK as an “AI maker rather than an AI taker” is that the UK has real potential in this area but lacks the resources to realize that potential. This suggests a candid recognition. But making that happen means we have to face two troubling truths.

The first is that this powerful technology is controlled by a small number of giant companies, none of which are based in the UK. Their power lies not only in their capital and human resources, but also in the vast physical infrastructure of data centers they own and manage. This means that any nation wishing to operate in this field must get along with them.

The UK Government needs to do a lot in this regard. The current attitude towards business is the snobbish attitude exhibited by Technology Secretary Peter Kyle, who said the Government needed to take a 'Government is' attitude.feeling humble” and uses a “national strategy” when dealing with technology giants, rather than using the threat of new legislation to influence developments in areas such as frontier artificial intelligence. In other words, the UK should treat these organizations as nation-states. Clearly, Kyle doesn't realize that appeasement is the art of being nice to the alligator in the hopes that it will eat you in the end.

Another troubling truth is that even though AI is powerful, economists like Nobel Prize winners Daron Acemoglu The general economic impact, at least in the short term, is believed to be significantly smaller than technology evangelists believe. Even worse, Economist Robert Gordon once pointed out thatgeneral-purpose technologies take a long time to have a significant impact. The message to the Prime Minister is clear. Becoming an “AI superpower” may take at least several election cycles.