Safety institute announces research projects as global focus shifts to AI adoption
It says the initial 10 projects will receive $100,000 each from its research program.
They include an initiative led by AI pioneer Yoshua Bengio that will look at the hidden reasons driving decisions by large language models, a type of generative AI focused on text.
The Canadian AI Safety Institute was launched last year, part of a global network of publicly backed safety institutes that emerged following a wave of calls from experts for AI regulation.
But there has been a global shift towards focusing on AI adoption over safety initiatives in recent months.
Wednesdays
Columnist Jen Zoratti looks at what's next in arts, life and pop culture.
In Canada, the Liberal government plans to prioritize AI's economic potential as it hosts the upcoming G7 summit, and new AI minister Evan Solomon has said nothing so far about his job description.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 9, 2025.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Toronto Sun
a day ago
- Toronto Sun
LeBlanc says he expects Carney, Trump will speak in the coming days
Published Aug 03, 2025 • 1 minute read US President Donald Trump speaks to the press as Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney looks on as they meet during the Group of Seven (G7) Summit at the Pomeroy Kananaskis Mountain Lodge in Kananaskis, Alberta, Canada on June 16, 2025. Photo by BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI / AFP via Getty Images OTTAWA — Dominic LeBlanc says he expects Prime Minister Mark Carney and U.S. President Donald Trump will speak 'over the next number of days' as the United States ratchets up pressure in trade talks. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. SUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account. Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments. Enjoy additional articles per month. Get email updates from your favourite authors. THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK. Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments Enjoy additional articles per month Get email updates from your favourite authors Don't have an account? Create Account The Canada-U.S. trade minister appeared on CBS's 'Face the Nation' on Sunday and spoke about where talks stand between the two countries. LeBlanc told host Margaret Brennan that while Canada is 'disappointed' with Trump's new 35-per-cent tariffs, he is continuing to work toward a deal that would hopefully strike down trade restrictions between the nations. LeBlanc was in Washington last week attempting to find common ground with the Trump administration ahead of Friday's deadline to secure a new deal between the trading partners. While Mexico was granted a 90-day delay on new duties, Trump on Friday hit Canada with a 35-per-cent tariff on all goods that are not compliant with the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement on trade. Canada also continues to face U.S. tariffs on steel, aluminum and automobiles as well as Trump's new 50-per-cent tariffs on semi-finished copper products. Toronto Blue Jays Columnists Sex Files Homes Columnists
Canada News.Net
a day ago
- Canada News.Net
Heres why the EU keeps losing to China
The summit Brussels-Beijing economic summit spotlighted the blocs mounting strategic confusion and accelerating drift toward isolation The China-EU summit held in Beijing late last month could have been a celebration of 50 years of diplomatic relations between two of the world's largest economic powers. Instead, it served as a sobering reminder of the EU's growing strategic confusion, and its inability to capitalize on the immense opportunities offered by cooperation with China. The summit came at a sensitive moment in global politics. What was once hailed as a mutually beneficial partnership has now become entangled in geopolitics, internal divisions within the EU, and the enduring shadow of Washington's influence. The global turbulence of recent years - the pandemic, and the war in Ukraine - has not only strained relations but also reinforced the EU's dependence on the United States. Rather than renewing a partnership that once stood as a pillar of global economic integration, the EU leaders arrived in Beijing with a familiar agenda: accusations over trade practices, warnings about "security threats," and renewed calls for China to "rein in" Russia. Predictably, no breakthrough was achieved. The deterioration of China-EU relations cannot be understood without revisiting the European Commission's strategic shift in 2019. Under Ursula von der Leyen, Brussels officially categorized China as not just a partner but also a "systemic rival" - a move that introduced suspicion into virtually every area of engagement. Since then, an ideological lens has increasingly shaped EU policy, replacing the pragmatism that once underpinned economic cooperation. The consequences have been stark. Brussels has launched measures to restrict Chinese investment, imposed high tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles, and - most recently - barred Chinese firms from public tenders worth over €5 million. Further escalation came when the EU included two Chinese banks in its latest sanctions package against Russia, signaling that Europe is willing to weaponize economic tools for political purposes. These steps are justified by the EU as "de-risking." By pushing for reduced interdependence in strategic sectors - raw materials, high-tech supply chains, and digital infrastructure - Brussels has aligned itself with Washington's containment playbook, even as European leaders publicly insist on independence. In Beijing, von der Leyen struck a conciliatory tone, declaring the EU's openness to Chinese investment and cooperation. But such statements ring hollow when juxtaposed with her recent warnings at the G7 summit about a looming "China shock" and accusations of Beijing "weaponizing trade." Similarly, the head of EU diplomacy, Kaja Kallas - also present in Beijing - has accused China of fueling the war in Ukraine and waging hybrid operations against Europe. These mixed signals undermine credibility and reinforce perceptions in Beijing that the EU lacks a coherent, autonomous China strategy. More fundamentally, Brussels' approach is internally contradictory. The EU dreams of "strategic autonomy," yet ties its foreign policy to transatlantic priorities. It seeks economic resilience, yet undermines its own competitiveness by disrupting supply chains and limiting market access. It aspires to global leadership, yet isolates itself from the rest of the world by clinging to zero-sum geopolitics. By contrast, China's position at the summit was clear: focus on complementarity, promote free trade, and pursue win-win cooperation in areas that matter for global stability - digital transformation, green development, and infrastructure connectivity. Beijing emphasized its willingness to deepen exchanges in artificial intelligence, clean energy, and scientific research, seeing these sectors as essential to both sides' modernization. For China, the EU remains a strategic partner, not an adversary. Beijing has long supported European integration and consistently encourages the EU to play an independent role in global affairs. From China's perspective, a strong, autonomous Europe is a counterweight to unilateralism and an anchor of multipolarity. This vision aligns with Europe's own interests - but diverges sharply from Washington's preference for a subordinate EU within the transatlantic alliance. From Beijing's perspective, the EU's current challenges - economic slowdown, energy insecurity, and geopolitical vulnerability - are not caused by China. Rather, they stem from internal divisions and policy choices that tether Europe to US strategies. China fears that Europe's drift into a hardline camp could destabilize the international order, a scenario contrary to Beijing's vision of stability and connectivity across Eurasia. The single most contentious issue remains the war in Ukraine. Brussels insists that China's ties with Moscow "destabilize" Europe, while Beijing argues that it is maintaining an independent and neutral position aimed at facilitating a peaceful settlement. EU leaders, however, continue to press China to "use its influence" to end Russia's military operations - effectively asking Beijing to abandon a key strategic partnership. This is neither realistic nor conducive to diplomacy. For now, this geopolitical deadlock overshadows other areas of potential cooperation. So long as the EU views the Ukraine conflict through an existential lens - and equates neutrality with complicity - China-EU relations will remain constrained, regardless of shared economic interests. Despite political frictions, economic ties remain robust. The EU is China's largest trading partner, and China ranks second for the EU. Together, they account for over one-third of global GDP and nearly 30% of global trade in goods and services. Chinese investment in Europe has surpassed $100 billion, and annual flows are roughly balanced with EU investment in China. These numbers underscore a basic truth: the China-EU relationship is too significant to be defined by ideological posturing. Global supply chains, green technology cooperation, and digital innovation cannot advance without mutual engagement. The question is whether Brussels will recognize this before further damage is done. The EU portrays its current trajectory as "rebalancing" and "de-risking." In reality, these policies risk strategic isolation. By securitizing economic ties and subordinating its diplomacy to US priorities in relation to China, the EU undermines its own competitiveness and alienates partners across the globe. The result is an inward-looking bloc that struggles to influence global norms as it dreams of geopolitical power. For China, the lesson is clear: The EU is not ready for a genuine reset. Beijing will continue to engage constructively but will not expect rapid progress. In the long run, the revival of a balanced partnership may depend on a political shift within Europe - a leadership willing to replace ideological rigidity with pragmatic cooperation. The Beijing summit, rather than rekindling optimism, has confirmed the structural divergence between China and the EU. However, it also highlighted what remains at stake: two economic giants whose cooperation - or confrontation - will shape global stability for decades to come. China stands ready to pursue a future based on multilateralism, open trade, and shared development. Whether the EU can free itself from delusions and anxieties and rediscover the value of partnership with Beijing remains an open question. Until then, the EU's fixation on "de-risking" may turn into what it fears most: self-inflicted decline.
Edmonton Journal
2 days ago
- Edmonton Journal
Gunter: Trudeau cost Canada a chance to get into global LNG game — Trump and U.S. are reaping the benefit
Article content Last Sunday, at President Donald Trump's golf resort in Scotland (a.k.a. King Donald's summer palace), Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Union pledged European countries would buy US$750 billion (over $1 trillion Canadian) of U.S. energy – largely LNG – over the next three years in return for Trump promising to impose only 15% tariffs on the union's member states. Article content Article content Boy, those American and European trade negotiators must be dunces. Don't they know that three years ago, then-German Chancellor Olaf Scholz made a special trip to Canada to ask our government to sell tens of billions in LNG to his country? Our economic genius of a prime minister, Justin Trudeau rejected Scholz's request because 'there is no business case' for selling LNG to Europe. Article content Article content Article content This past Thursday, the South Koreans made a similar deal with the U.S. — $100 billion (about $138 billion Canadian) in energy over four years, primarily LNG. Article content What's wrong with these countries? Can they not see that the greatest economic mind of the 21st Century, Justin Pierre James Trudeau, had decreed it was foolhardy to sign such agreements? Article content Article content The U.S. deals with the EU and Korea just for LNG are worth about $800 billion Canadian over the next four years. The rest of the sales are for oil and nuclear fuels. Article content Article content A good part of that market might have been Canada's had we not been ruled by a 'green' dreamweaver and eco-cultist who prevented this country from jumping into the world LNG market early in the game. Article content Now the Americans have sucked up a lot of the oxygen in the room, and it will be hard for Canada to get a foothold, even if current Liberal Prime Minister Mark Carney gets off his duff and agrees to more pipelines and LNG ports. Article content Trudeau's thinking (which remains Carney's thinking until the current Liberal government does more than just talk a good game) cost Canada at least $400 billion in investment during the Trudeau decade, drove down our per capita income, dropped us out of the 25 richest countries in the world, distorted our housing market and drove up prices and unemployment.
