MArietje Schake is a former member of the European Parliament from the Netherlands. She currently serves as the Director of International Policy at the Stanford University Cyber ​​Policy Center and an International Policy Fellow at Stanford University.
Human Centered Artificial Intelligence Research Institute. The title of her new book is
High-tech coup: How to save democracy from Silicon Valley.
What are the key differences between big technology companies and traditional big companies in terms of power and political influence?
The difference is the role these technology companies play in various aspects of people’s lives, including nation-states, economies, and geopolitics. Thus, although former monopolies had accumulated a lot of capital and important positions, they were usually in one sector, such as oil or automobile production. These technology companies are like octopuses with tentacles pointing in different directions. They have so much data, location data, search, communications, critical infrastructure that they can now combine all that power to build AI that we’ve never seen before. It’s very different from what we’ve seen.
Peter Kyle, UK Technology Secretary
recently proposed
The government is
“Feeling humble”
with major technology companies
treat them like a nation-state
. What do you think about that?
I think this is a baffling misunderstanding of the role of democratically elected and responsible leaders. Yes, these companies have become incredibly powerful. The comparison with the role of the state is therefore understandable. Because these companies are increasingly making decisions that were once the exclusive domain of states. But the answer, especially from governments on the rise, should be less about showing humility and more about reinforcing the primacy of democratic governance and oversight. What is needed is confidence on the part of democratic governments to ensure that these companies and services are playing their proper role within, and not overtaking, a system based on the rule of law.
What impact do you think the inauguration of President Donald Trump will have?
The election of Donald Trump changes everything. Because he has brought certain technology interests closer together than any previous political leader, especially in the United States, a powerful geopolitical and technological hub. There are many cryptocurrencies that support Trump. There are many VCs [venture capitalists] And, of course, he promoted Elon Musk and announced an agenda of deregulation. Every step his administration takes will be influenced by these factors, whether it’s the personal interests of Elon Musk and his companies or the personal preferences of the president and his supporters. On the other hand, Musk is actually critical of some of the dynamics surrounding AI, namely the existential risks. We’ll have to wait and see how long the honeymoon between him and Trump lasts, and how other big tech companies react. Because they’re not happy that Mr. Musk dictates technology policy more than his competitors. I think there will be difficult times ahead.
Why have politicians taken such a casual approach in the face of the digital technology revolution?
All of the most powerful companies we see today are based on this kind of progressive, liberal trend of the California counterculture, a few guys in shorts writing code in their basements and garages, and superpowers. It was rooted in a romantic story about challenging the world. Publishers of media companies, hotel branches, taxi companies, financial services, etc. had a pretty bad reputation from the beginning. There was certainly room for chaos, but this kind of underdog spirit was incredibly powerful. Both companies have done a really smart job of framing what they’re doing as decentralization, much like the Internet itself. Companies like Google and Facebook have consistently argued that any regulatory action would harm the internet. So it’s a combination of wanting to believe in promises and not understanding how very narrow corporate interests were won at the expense of the public interest.
Are any major politicians prepared to stand up to big tech interests?
well someone likes [US senator] Elizabeth Warren has the clearest vision of excessive power and abuse by corporations, including the technology industry. She has consistently tried to address this issue. But broadly speaking, I worry that political leaders are not taking this the way they should. There is not much vision in the European Commission. I’ve seen elections, including in my own country, where technology was not a topic at all. We also see comments like this from the UK government, and it may seem logical to have democratic guardrails around overly powerful companies.
Are politicians held back by technological ignorance?
Yes, I think they are threatened. But I also believe that the framework for government agencies is intentional by technology companies. It’s important to understand that how we are taught to think about technology is shaped by the technology companies themselves. And you get the whole narrative that the government is so stupid, so outdated, so poor in service delivery that it’s basically unqualified to deal with technology. The message is, if you can’t even process your taxes on time, what are you going to do with AI? This is a caricature of the government, and the government should not accept that caricature.
Do you think the UK’s position with big tech companies has weakened as a result of Brexit?
Yes and no. Australia and Canada have technology policies, but their numbers are smaller than the population of the UK. I don’t know if that’s the case. I think it’s actually a much more deliberate choice to want to attract investment. So maybe it’s just self-interest that goes beyond the Conservative and Labor governments. Because I expected changes, but I don’t see much change in technology policy. I was clearly too optimistic.
After newsletter promotion
We are talking about the restoration of sovereignty. Do you think most people are aware?
Does this mean that sovereignty has been lost?
One of the reasons I wrote this book was to reach the average news reader, not technology experts. It’s a tough job to explain that this is an issue that concerns people. It will be interesting to see how the impact of the Trump administration invites reactions not only from European leaders but also from other countries around the world who believe they cannot afford to rely on American tech companies. . That’s not what you want. Because, essentially, we’re sending euros and pounds to Silicon Valley, and what do we get in return? Even more dependence. As incredibly difficult as it is, things won’t get better if you do nothing.
Source: www.theguardian.com
