\u00a0<\/p>\n Will china dominate AI?<\/strong><\/p>\n When I spoke at the UK China business forum<\/a> last month, I discussed this topic in response to an audience question.<\/p>\n In the current climate of nationalistic fervour, I see the same question asked in many guises.<\/p>\n For example, Politico present the problem of AI dominance<\/a> as a threat perspective (a sputnik moment for the USA)<\/p>\n I summarise my views below.<\/p>\n As a disclosure, these are personal views. They are not associated with any organisation I am connected with (commercial or academic)<\/p>\n Like many in Europe, I take the view of building bridges and of collaboration.<\/p>\n In many ways \u2013 the question of AI dominance is the wrong question<\/p>\n A view also echoed by others in Europe such as allai \u2013 there is no ai race<\/a><\/p>\n I have worked with Chinese AI companies (in robotics) and also enjoyed working with excellent Chinese students who I have mentored.<\/p>\n I am also familiar with the Chinese education system \u2013 such as the Gaokao<\/a> \u00a0<\/p>\n For anyone exploring AI and China, Kai Fu Lee\u2019s book AI superpowers<\/a> provides a great starting point<\/p>\n The key lessons from that book, as I see them, are:<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n All of this is true \u2013 for example – if current trends continue, China will overtake the US in the most-cited 50 percent of AI papers this year, the most-cited 10 percent next year, and the most-cited 1 percent by 2025<\/a>.\u00a0 Via exponential view<\/a><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n China has a three-step plan for AI<\/a>: firstly, it must be able to keep pace with all leading AI technology, and its application in general, by 2020. Part two is to make major breakthroughs by 2025, which is intended to lead to the third part of the plan \u2013 the establishment of China as the world leader in the AI field by 2030<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n So, why is AI dominance the wrong question?<\/p>\n While every major country has national strategies for AI<\/a> \u00a0\u00a0I believe that no country can dominate the complex AI space<\/p>\n To elaborate, here is an example from another domain<\/p>\n In early 2000s, with the start of 3G, \u00a0NTT docomo and imode was expected to dominate<\/p>\n Everyone looked to Japan and Korea for the future of mobile<\/p>\n Indeed, Japanese and Korean mobile applications were rich media and cool<\/p>\n In fact, too rich media \u00a0\u00a0for world domination<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n In all other parts of the world, the networks were not advanced<\/p>\n And by the time they were, along came the iPhone and there was never a talk of a Korean or a Japanese company becoming the world leader in mobile (like the iPhone has become)<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n The early successes of iMode and other systems were due to deployment and standardization in specific geographies<\/p>\n standardization creates winners only in your local geography<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n By definition, that\u2019s not world domination<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n Instead it is more relevant to focus on fundamental strengths and enable private companies to innovate<\/p>\n<\/p>\n We are seeing the same in AI. Many of the advantages gained through Data for example are not translatable to other geographies (unless you can get hold of relevant data in those geographies – which is highly unlikely)\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n By this nuanced definition, there are many areas of excellence<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Obviously, China appears in many of these and in that sense will be a key player – but I do not expect a single dominant player to emerge.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Image source: Digital crew<\/a><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Go to Source<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<\/a><\/p>\n
Introduction<\/h2>\n
Background<\/h2>\n
\n
Why is AI dominance the wrong question?<\/h2>\n
\n
Conclusions<\/h2>\n
\n