AI arms race between the USA and China: No brake in sight, but initial approaches to security

It's amazing: We live in the age of artificial intelligence, but the arguments sound like they're from the 80s. They are always the same, something like this: Why should we of all people give up something? First the others! With this attitude there is no arms control, there is no effective fight against climate change; and it looks like there will be no limit to the breakneck frenzy in the development of artificial intelligence any time soon (more on that here). Because Donald Trump and Xi Jinping have no interest in putting the brakes on.

At least small progress could be made, such as setting up a hotline for serious incidents in the area of ​​AI security. That would be a start; such a red telephone had already proven itself in the Cold War. And who knows, maybe the AI ​​will soon be as smart as it ever was: in the 1983 film “War Games” it finally realized that no one can win in the battle of the great powers to trump themselves.

The whole conversation here: “China and the USA both think: only one can win when it comes to AI.”

The driving forces are therefore, firstly, government investments; the special fund is having an impact. And secondly, surprisingly increasing exports. However, they probably have an unpleasant reason: German companies benefit from the fact that their Asian competitors are suffering from trade restrictions due to ongoing conflicts, for example the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. But it won't stay closed forever. However, there remain two equally important factors for a robust upswing: private consumption and corporate investment remain weak.

So shouldn't we be happy when the institutes finally present a positive outlook today? I think: yes. At the risk of sounding like a compulsively optimistic politician, I think that the most important ingredient for a real upswing is confidence.

More background information here: Is the upswing finally here? And does he stay?

While I'm currently preaching, here's a quick event tip: Next Wednesday, September 30th, my colleague Markus Feldenkirchen will welcome former Federal President Joachim Gauck for a top-level discussion. It's about a question that probably concerns us all at the moment: What does the AfD victory mean for our country? You can see what answers Joachim Gauck finds to this on Wednesday in Berlin's Admiralspalast: there are still maps here.

Maybe you have to drive straight away, maybe you'll cross one or two 30 km/h zones on your journey, and maybe you'll be annoyed that you're not allowed to drive faster here - after all, you're in a hurry! Then the study that my colleague Lukas Kissel is reporting exclusively on today should give you something to think about: Accident researchers have found that the number of accidents with serious injuries and fatalities falls by more than half in newly created 30-hour sections. And that's even though, on average, drivers don't drive that much slower than before. And that also applies to the kind of accidents for which the speed limit doesn't seem to matter.

That sounds paradoxical at first, but the researchers have a plausible explanation for it: Apparently the 30 km/h speed limit acts like a warning signal to road users that says: Attention, you have to pay attention here. But this is only proven for selective 30s sections. The impact of a nationwide speed limit has not yet been researched.

But please don't get the wrong idea and basically just rush past the 30 speed signs at 50 km/h, because speed doesn't really matter that much. This study cannot be understood that way! If you think like that, let the speed camera catch you until your account in Flensburg bursts.

The whole story here: Why 30 km/h works - even though hardly anyone drives slower