China urges global consensus on balancing AI development, security
"The risks and challenges brought by artificial intelligence have drawn widespread attention... How to find a balance between development and security urgently requires further consensus from the entire society," the premier said.
Li said China would "actively promote" the development of
open-source AI
, adding Beijing was willing to share advances with other countries, particularly developing ones.
"If we engage in technological monopolies, controls and blockage, artificial intelligence will become the preserve of a few countries and a few enterprises," he said.
"Only by adhering to openness, sharing and fairness in access to intelligence can more countries and groups benefit from (AI)."
The premier highlighted "insufficient supply of computing power and chips" as a bottleneck.
Washington has expanded its efforts in recent years to curb exports of state-of-the-art chips to China, concerned that these can be used to advance Beijing's military systems and erode US tech dominance.
For its part, China has made AI a pillar of its plans for technological self-reliance, with the government pledging a raft of measures to boost the sector.
In January, Chinese startup DeepSeek unveiled an AI model that performed as well as top US systems despite using less powerful chips.
'Pet tiger cub'
At a time when AI is being integrated across virtually all industries, its uses have raised major ethical questions, from the spread of misinformation to its impact on employment, or the potential loss of technological control.
In a speech at WAIC on Saturday, Nobel Prize-winning physicist Geoffrey Hinton compared the situation to keeping "a very cute tiger cub as a pet".
"To survive", he said, you need to ensure you can train it not to kill you when it grows up.
In a video message played at the WAIC opening ceremony, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said
AI governance
would be "a defining test of international cooperation".
The ceremony also saw the French president's AI envoy, Anne Bouverot, underscore the "an urgent need" for global action.
At an AI summit in Paris in February, 58 countries including China, France and India -- as well as the European Union and African Union Commission -- called for enhanced coordination on AI governance.
But the United States warned against "excessive regulation", and alongside the United Kingdom, refused to sign the summit's appeal for an "open", "inclusive" and "ethical" AI.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
21 minutes ago
- The Hindu
From The Hindu, July 28, 1975: Chinese theory on height of Everest
Tokyo, July 27: The exact height of the world's highest peak Mount Everest is 8,848.13 metres or 34 metres lower than the hitherto accepted figure of 3,882 metres. This has been determined by a team of Chinese surveyors and cartographers who accompanied the Chinese mountaineering expedition which reportedly ascended the peak last May, according to the official Hsinhua News Agency which gave some details of how the new height of Everest was determined in a Peking despatch on Thursday. The report said the Chinese surveyors and cartographers working in the face of extremely difficult conditions had succeeded in extending the national geodestic survey control network to the east main and west Rongbuk glaciers on the north slope of the mountain. They had carried out triangular traverse astronomical and gravity surveys at attitudes of 5,000 to 7,000 metres above sea level and counter checked the precise levelling of the area between Tingri and the Rongbuk monastery thus providing a reliable control basis for determining the height of Everest. After a surveying pole had been erected on the summit and the thickness of the accumulated snow there measured, the surveyors and cartographers had proceeded to conduct simultaneous observation and survey from ten triangulation points located 7 to 21 km. from the summit at altitudes of 5,600 to 6,300 metres. This operation had resulted in a complete set of data for mapping out the geographical location and the height of the peak.
India.com
21 minutes ago
- India.com
China Triggers Alarm With 1,000 KM Range Air-To-Air Hypersonic Missile; Who Should Be Worried?
Beijing: China has reportedly tested an air-to-air missile capable of striking aerial targets at a distance of up to 1,000 kilometres. It has sent ripples across the global defense community. If accurate, the test could signal a fundamental shift in modern air combat strategy. It will potentially allow fighter jets to neutralise enemy aircraft long before they even come into radar range. The development was first reported by South China Morning Post, citing Chinese military sources. According to the report, the missile reaches speeds beyond Mach 5. It has placed it in the hypersonic category. It is designed to intercept high-value aerial targets, including stealth fighters and surveillance aircraft. Chinese engineers are said to be working on this new system with the aim of providing long-range superiority across contested airspaces. Still unnamed publicly, the project may allow China to target aircraft such as the U.S. F-22 Raptor, F-35 stealth fighters and the B-21 Raider well before they enter engagement range. Missiles of this class are typically referred to as Beyond Visual Range (BVR) air-to-air missiles. They form a critical part of next-generation aerial warfare. Until now, the longest-range BVR missiles in service globally include Russia's R-37M and the U.S. AIM-174B. Both are capable of reaching distances around 350-400 kilometres. Presently under development, India's Astra Mk-3 is expected to match that range once deployed. However, a 1,000-kilometre air-to-air missile would outclass all existing systems. Experts say that if China's claims are validated, the development could force countries like India, Japan, Taiwan and even the United States to re-evaluate their air combat doctrines. No matter how stealthy, no fighter jet could escape a missile launched from that distance. The implications are serious, assuming tracking and targeting systems remain precise. Historically, air-to-air missiles have evolved from short-range weapons introduced in the 1950s, such as the U.S. AIM-9 Sidewinder and the Soviet K-series, to the BVR missiles of today. The modern battlefield increasingly depends on aerial platforms like AWACS and AEW&CS for surveillance and coordination. A missile capable of striking these assets from such vast ranges could potentially change the outcome of future conflicts before they even escalate. India, which currently fields the Astra Mk-1 and is working on Astra Mk-2 and Mk-3, faces a widening gap in this segment. While the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) has made consistent progress, there are calls within India's strategic community to accelerate indigenous hypersonic missile development. In addition, India may need to invest more heavily in advanced radar systems and tracking sensors, potentially through ISRO-DRDO collaboration, to detect and respond to threats launched from long distances at high speeds. As per the latest assessments, India's current missile capabilities are limited to around 400 kilometres in range. While the Chinese claim has not yet been independently verified, military analysts suggest it would be prudent for India to consider the scenario as credible and prepare accordingly. The development comes at a time when tensions remain high in East Asia, particularly around Taiwan and the South China Sea. If China's new missile enters operational service, it could give the country significant leverage across the region, including air dominance over key hotspots. Though the precise operational status of the missile remains unclear, the signal from Beijing is loud enough. Nations dependent on legacy BVR systems now face pressure to catch up, both in terms of range and speed, before the skies become inaccessible.
India.com
21 minutes ago
- India.com
Free Trade or Colonial Bias? After India-UK FTA, Homegrown Liquor Makers Accuse British Market Of Discriminating Against Indian Brands
New Delhi: The ink was barely dry on the India-UK Free Trade Agreement (FTA) when a new unease began brewing, not in trade offices, but in the distilleries of India. A growing number of Indian liquor companies say they are feeling left out and locked out. While the FTA has opened India's gates wider for British gin and Scotch with reduced import duties, the doors to the U.K. market, they claim, remain unfairly barricaded for Indian-made spirits. At the center of the anger is the Confederation of Indian Alcoholic Beverage Companies (CIABC), a body that speaks for India's local liquor manufacturers. According to its Director General Anant S Iyer, what India removed in tariff walls, the United Kingdom has maintained in 'non-tariff barriers', rules that may not show up in price charts but block access all the same. 'The United Kingdom and even the European Union (EU) do not allow fair imports of most Indian-Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) products into their markets due to non-tariff barriers related to maturation and ingredients. We only wish that the Indian government had stood firm on the issue of non-tariff barriers,' he said. The bone of contention is the UK's strict definition of what can be sold as whisky. The British standard mandates that whisky must be matured for a minimum of three years. This rule is applied to both domestic and imported spirits. But Iyer says what works in cold European cellars does not work in the Indian climate. 'In India, the maturation is much faster due to the tropical climate. If we keep it for three years, we lose almost one-third of the spirit to evaporation. That is a financial loss. It also changes the flavour profile. It is a punishment for making whisky in a warmer land,' he explained. Because of the three-year rule, Indian whiskies that mature faster due to heat are disqualified from calling themselves 'whisky' under British law. Instead, they must be labelled as 'Indian spirits', a description that, Iyer says, cuts them off from mainstream whisky shelves and consumer attention in the United Kingdom and Europe. 'We want to be allowed to call it Indian Whisky or Indian Rum or Indian Brandy. Let consumers decide. Let the market decide. Right now, we are kept out simply because we do not age our spirits in cold basements,' he added. The CIABC has now urged the Indian government to actively pursue the matter with the United Kingdom. They argue that without reciprocal access for Indian products, the billion-dollar export vision for the Indian liquor industry will remain out of reach. 'The government has set an ambitious target of achieving $1 billion in exports from the Indian alcobev (alcoholic beverage) industry by 2030. However, without ensuring proper market access, it will be difficult to meet this target. Though Indian whiskies, rum, gins, wines, etc. have been winning accolades globally, the lack of removal of non-tariff barriers and absence of reciprocal market access will make this export target hard to achieve,' Iyer said. There is also growing concern about what is flowing into India. While British spirits are now allowed in at lower duties, Indian manufacturers fear that Scotch whisky and other bottled-in-origin (BIO) liquors may soon dominate Indian shelves by being routed through third countries at cut prices, hurting the premium Indian market before it even matures. To counter this, the CIABC has recommended that the Indian government fix a Minimum Import Price (MIP) on such foreign products. 'The government has incorporated MIP in the India-UK FTA on rum, brandy and other liquor products. The only exception on this count being Scotch Whisky/other whiskies/Gin originating from the United Kingdom,' Iyer added. He urged the government to monitor billing data and use technology to trace each bottle from port to shelf. 'We hope the government will ensure that Scotch whisky and other BIO spirits are not dumped in India at low import prices or routed through any other country at cheaper rates. This will hurt the growth of premium and luxury Indian brands,' he said. For now, India's liquor makers are pouring their hopes into diplomatic channels. Their demands include recognition, fairness and a level playing field. 'We do not want favours. We just want the right to sell our products under the names they deserve,' Iyer concluded.
