&w=3840&q=100)
Can China compete against US in AI talent war with homegrown minds?
The competition for AI talent prompted Meta Platforms Inc. to reportedly offer sign-on bonuses of $100 million to lure senior staff from rivals. It feels 'as if someone has broken into our home and stolen something,' OpenAI's chief research officer said of the aggressive poaching in a memo to staff obtained by Wired. The latest victim: Apple Inc., which just lost top executive Ruoming Pang to Meta.
It's telling that so many of the superstar players US tech titans are boasting about adding to their rosters are of Chinese origin. Including Pang, eight out of the 12 new recruits to the Meta Superintelligence Labs team graduated from universities on the mainland before pursuing careers abroad. It means that a key driver of the global AI race is an intense scramble for the people building it: Chinese talent.
But American business leaders shouldn't assume that the big paychecks alone will win an international talent contest. Researchers at Harvard University last month said that the number of high-impact scientific publications shows that China dominates in 'raw human capital for AI.' This helps drive indigenous research despite US advantages in computing power and investment. Top workers may still be keen on making money overseas, but that doesn't mean a lot of them won't stay at home.
Separate researchers at Stanford University in May analyzed data on the more than 200 authors listed on DeepSeek's technical papers. The firm's success story is 'fundamentally, one of homegrown talent,' they found. Half of DeepSeek's team never left China for education or work, and those who did ultimately returned to pursue AI development. This has policy implications for the US.
China looks at international experience less as a brain drain and more as a way for researchers to acquire knowledge before returning home, the Stanford paper said. The US 'may be mistakenly assuming it has a permanent talent lead.'
It aligns with other data that suggests America has been losing its allure as a destination for top-tier AI researchers. Only 42 per cent of these individuals worked in the US in 2022, compared to 59 per cent in 2019. During that same period, China was closing the gap fast, rising to 28 per cent from 11 per cent.
The Chinese government, meanwhile, has been funding AI labs and research at universities as part of industrial policy. It's not clear how well this investment has paid off, but it has helped incubate talent who went on to support breakthroughs at private companies. One of DeepSeek's keystone papers, for example, was co-authored by scholars at Tsinghua University, Peking University and Nanjing University. In this way, China has been building up an ecosystem of innovation that doesn't center around poaching individual star players.
Domestic firms are less able to spend so lavishly to attract top talent. US private investment in AI was nearly 12 times the amount in China, according to one analysis. Earlier this year, state-backed news outlet the Global Times reported on the 'high-paying job offers' from DeepSeek, which could amount to annual income of some 1.54 million yuan per year (just under $215,000). It's a significant sum in urban China, but hardly the instant millionaire-minting figures being tossed around in Silicon Valley.
DeepSeek is nonetheless in the midst of a recruiting blitz — one that's trying to attract overseas Chinese AI researchers to come back home. It has posted a spate of roles on LinkedIn, a platform that's not used domestically. As my colleague Dave Lee has written, this is about more than just money, but instead convincing workers that their contribution 'will matter most in the history books.' DeepSeek may be hoping that this pitch will work on homesick Chinese talent.
Ultimately, just under half of the world's top-tier AI researchers come from China, compared to 18 per cent from the US. Many may be seeking opportunities abroad, but Beijing is pulling all its levers to convince at least some to stay at a time when America isn't signaling a warm welcome. Mind boggling sign-on bonuses from Silicon Valley may be enough to win a cross-border battle for talent, but time will tell if it's enough to win the war.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
42 minutes ago
- Time of India
US student loan crisis deepens: How SAVE Plan borrowers could pay $3,500 more in interest annually
US student loan crisis deepens under SAVE Plan. The financial burden on millions of American student loan borrowers is set to increase substantially from next month, following a major policy shift by the US Department of Education. Interest will resume on student loans under the federal SAVE repayment plan from August 1, a move that could result in an average additional cost of $3,500 (approximately ₹2.9 lakh) annually per borrower, according to recent estimates. The decision comes amid ongoing legal battles over President Joe Biden's flagship student loan relief initiative, the SAVE (Saving on a Valuable Education) plan, which had temporarily paused both payments and interest accrual for eligible borrowers since mid-2023. The Education Department now cites a February 2025 court ruling as the reason it can no longer legally suspend interest, even as repayments remain on hold. 7.84 million borrowers affected According to official figures, the interest resumption will impact approximately 7.84 million borrowers currently enrolled in the SAVE plan. While monthly repayments are still paused under an extended forbearance, interest will begin accumulating from August, potentially adding to the long-term debt load of affected individuals. An analysis released by the Student Borrower Protection Center (SBPC) estimates that the change could lead to an aggregate increase of $27 million in interest charges over a 12-month period. The average borrower under the SAVE plan, which was designed to provide income-driven relief, could now be charged around $300 per month in interest—a sharp deviation from the original framework of the programme. Legal and administrative bottlenecks The Education Department has maintained that the February ruling invalidated the legal basis it used to pause interest accrual. As a result, it has begun notifying borrowers of the change. However, critics argue that no court order explicitly mandates the resumption of interest, and that the Department retains discretion under federal law to waive interest during periods of suspension. Compounding the issue is the administrative backlog facing the Department. According to court filings, nearly 1.5 million applications for alternative income-driven repayment (IDR) plans remain unprocessed. Borrowers have been advised to consider switching from the SAVE plan to other IDR plans such as Income-Based Repayment (IBR), Pay As You Earn (PAYE), or Income-Contingent Repayment (ICR) to potentially avoid interest accrual. However, processing delays could leave many borrowers in limbo for weeks or even months. Wider implications for international students The policy change has implications for international students, including thousands of Indian-origin graduates in the US who rely on federal aid and income-driven repayment options. Many of these borrowers enrolled in the SAVE plan expecting extended relief and predictable repayment terms. The sudden shift in interest accrual conditions has added uncertainty to financial planning for both current and prospective students. The development marks a fresh chapter in the prolonged battle over student loan relief in the United States. The Biden administration's broader student debt cancellation efforts have faced repeated legal challenges from Republican-led states, stalling or reversing key components of reform. The SAVE plan, once heralded as a game-changing safety net for low- and middle-income borrowers, now faces an uncertain future as litigation continues. What lies ahead While loan repayments under the SAVE plan are not expected to resume until at least December 2025, the resumption of interest could sharply increase the financial burden on borrowers in the interim. Advocacy groups have called for immediate administrative relief and faster processing of repayment plan transitions, but the Department's legal position remains unchanged as of now. Borrowers are advised to monitor official updates, review their loan status, and explore alternative plans promptly. As legal challenges continue and administrative delays persist, millions remain caught in a widening student debt crisis with no immediate resolution in sight. Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
Mint
44 minutes ago
- Mint
India revises proposed retaliatory duties against US over steel, aluminium tariffs in WTO
New Delhi, Jul 10 (PTI) India has revised its proposal to impose retaliatory duties under the WTO (World Trade Organisation) norms against the US over American tariffs on steel and aluminium in view of the further hike in duty by the Trump administration. The US first imposed 25 per cent tariffs on imports of aluminium, steel and derivative articles on March 12. Again, on June 3, the taxes were hiked to 50 per cent. "Without prejudice to its earlier notification to the Council for Trade in Goods and the Committee on Safeguards dated May 12, India reserves its right to adjust the products and tariff rates. This request is made in response to the increase in the tariff rate by the US from 25 per cent ad valorem to 50 per cent," the WTO has said in a communication on Wednesday. This was circulated among WTO members at the request of India. It said that the proposed suspension of concessions or other obligations can take the form of an increase in tariffs on selected products originating in the US. "The safeguard measures would affect USD 7.6 billion imports into the United States of the relevant products originating in India, on which the duty collection would be USD 3.82 billion," it said. Accordingly, India's proposed suspension of concessions would result in an equivalent amount of duty collected from products originating in America. In the May 12 communication, the duty collection figure was stated as USD 1.91 billion. The first Trump administration, in 2018, imposed a 25 per cent duty on certain steel items and a 10 per cent duty on aluminium products on the grounds of national security. In retaliation, India in June 2019 slapped customs duties on 28 US products, including almonds and walnuts. India had also filed a complaint in the WTO. The proposal assumes significance as both countries are negotiating a Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA). The Indian team is also expected to visit Washington next week to the US for trade talks.
Mint
44 minutes ago
- Mint
Brics isn't an anti-US forum, it's a voice of the Global South
Gift this article It likes to think of itself as the developing world's equivalent of the Group of Seven. Yet unlike the G-7, the Brics bloc—designed for Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, but now expanded to 11 members—has sharply diverging interests. It includes energy exporters like Saudi Arabia and the UAE, as well as importers like India; material-hungry manufacturing giants like China and commodity superpowers like Brazil; moderate democracies like Indonesia and extremist theocracies like Iran. It likes to think of itself as the developing world's equivalent of the Group of Seven. Yet unlike the G-7, the Brics bloc—designed for Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, but now expanded to 11 members—has sharply diverging interests. It includes energy exporters like Saudi Arabia and the UAE, as well as importers like India; material-hungry manufacturing giants like China and commodity superpowers like Brazil; moderate democracies like Indonesia and extremist theocracies like Iran. If there's one thing that almost all of them have in common, however, it's that they want to ensure the grouping's most powerful member, China, doesn't dominate. Beijing might want to use its influence over global trade to increase the use of the yuan; but India has made it clear that replacing the US dollar as the global reserve currency isn't part of Brics's mandate. Some of the newer members, such as the UAE, are close US allies. Also Read: Brics isn't out to build a wall but serve the Global South Of course, US policy is not universally popular, either. When is it ever? At the Brics meeting this week in Brazil, leaders jointly condemned the 'indiscriminate rising of tariffs," in a swipe at US President Donald Trump's trade policy. But Trump was not criticized half as harshly as the Europeans were: Their carbon border taxes were described as 'unilateral, punitive and discriminatory protectionist measures that are not in line with international law." Partly that's because the Global South is divided on tariffs, just as it is on everything else. Yes, it might be unfair that poorer countries are losing market access to richer ones—that's a violation of normal economic logic, in which the poor sell to the rich and everyone's better off as a result. But most in the developing world might well welcome tariffs on China; they agree its stranglehold on global manufacturing must somehow be loosened. They are saying: We're not going to condemn US tariffs targeted at China as strongly as we do European barriers, because doing so would mean playing Beijing's game. The only thing that could push these diverse nations together is if the US makes a real effort to present itself to them as a shared target. Unfortunately, that's exactly what Trump apparently wants to do. He responded to Brics's Rio summit by threatening an extra 10% tariff on 'any country aligning themselves with the Anti-American policies of Brics." That plays into China's hands. Nothing would strengthen Beijing's case to lead the emerging world more than US efforts to paint a basically innocuous, ineffectual grouping as 'anti-American." India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi certainly wouldn't participate in a summit that was designed to be anti-American. If anything, India's participation in the Brics is meant to highlight its own bid for leadership of the Global South—or, at least, its determined attempt to deny that position to Beijing. On his way to Rio, Modi stopped off in multiple developing countries—Namibia, Ghana, Trinidad and Argentina. It's an interesting group, one that clarifies India's Global South strategy. The diaspora is one quiver in Modi's bow: People of Indian descent are the largest ethnic group in Trinidad and Tobago. India's hunger for commodities is another component—imports of cooking oil from Argentina have soared since Ukrainian sunflower oil was taken off the market by Russia's invasion in 2022. Ghana exports more to gold-hungry India than anywhere else. And the global race to access the raw materials of the future is part of it as well. Indian companies have been pushed to find ways to process lithium and other critical minerals in Argentina and Namibia. Also Read: China plus one: It's a moving target that India can still strike It's just not possible for India to immediately substitute for China—or anyone else—as an economic partner in most parts of the world. But a strategy that's more concentrated geographically and focused on sectors like critical minerals and agri-processing might work, particularly because India's private sector-driven economic model is far more inclusive and open to local value creation than China's approach. The real lesson of the Rio Brics summit, and Modi's meandering journey to it, is that it isn't meant to be a forum for the Global South to be anti-American. It's better understood as a place where countries bid to lead the Global South. Not all those propositions are designed around diminishing the US role in the world. Such competition is healthy, for the West as well as the South. Trump should not push a group so distrustful of each other into forming a common cause instead. Instead, make some friends, and keep them—or China will steal them from you. ©Bloomberg The author is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist. Topics You May Be Interested In
