Artificial intelligence Archives | Page 8 of 713

Australia announces national AI standards and new AI office

Australia has announced plans for mandatory national AI standards and established a new Office of AI within the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the measures would coordinate AI policy across government, protect national interests and strengthen Australia’s sovereign technological capacity.

The proposed framework would bring large AI data centres under nationally consistent rules covering their location, infrastructure, energy use and water consumption.

Albanese plans to seek agreement from state and territory leaders at the National Cabinet in August 2026, with legislation expected to be introduced to Parliament in early 2027.

The next generation of large data centres could be legally required to underwrite new power supplies, cover their share of grid connection costs and add at least as much electricity to the grid as they consume.

Facilities would also be required to minimise water use, improve energy efficiency and fund any additional water infrastructure they need.

The government plans to strengthen protections for Australian writers, musicians, artists and journalists, arguing that creators should retain control over whether and on what terms their work is used to train AI systems.

The new Office of AI will coordinate government work across industry, employment, education, energy, copyright, online safety, productivity and national security.

Australia also wants to attract frontier AI investment and increase domestic development, linking sovereign AI capability to secure employment, economic resilience and reduced dependence on foreign technology platforms.

Why does it matter?

Australia’s announcement connects AI governance with physical infrastructure, copyright, energy policy and technological sovereignty. National rules could reduce fragmented approval processes while requiring large data centres to account for their effects on electricity, water and local infrastructure. Central coordination through the Office of AI may also help align policies that currently span several departments. However, the eventual impact will depend on the legislation, enforcement mechanisms and copyright protections that the government develops.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

UN chief warns against concentrated AI power

UN Secretary-General António Guterres has called for AI to be governed through broad international cooperation rather than shaped by a small group of governments and technology companies. Speaking at the opening of the World Artificial Intelligence Conference in Shanghai, he described AI as “humanity’s greatest opportunity in the 21st century”, while warning that it could also become “one of its greatest risks”.

“Technology that will shape the future of humanity must be shaped by all of humanity”, Guterres said. He stressed that AI governance cannot be governed by a handful of countries or companies” and that “every nation needs a seat at the table”. Recent UN efforts include the Global Digital Compact, the Independent International Scientific Panel on AI and the first Global Dialogue on AI Governance, held in Geneva earlier in July.

AI could support medical research, education, food systems, employment and progress towards the sustainable development goals, but unequal access remains a major concern. “One-third of humanity is still offline,” Guterres noted, warning that concentrated computing capacity, expertise and investment could produce “greater inequalities, greater divides in income, in opportunity, in security”. More than 20 countries have nominated centres for a UN-supported capacity-building network, while recommendations for a Global Fund for AI are also expected.

The UN chief identified capacity development, common safety standards and environmental sustainability as central priorities. “Human rights must be protected”, the UN chief said. “Humans must keep control over every life-and-death decision.” He also stressed that “no AI system should be put in a child’s hands before it has been proven safe”.

Guterres called on major AI companies to disclose their environmental impact and use renewable energy by 2030. “The defining question is whether that transformation will reduce inequalities or reinforce them,” he said. “Whether it will concentrate power or expand opportunity.”

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

EU adopts AI governance principles for health technology assessments

The EU’s Health Technology Assessment Coordination Group has adopted principles governing the use of AI in health technology assessments, requiring transparency, human oversight and accountability when AI assists in preparing evidence dossiers.

The guidance apply to dossiers submitted by health technology developers for Joint Clinical Assessments under the EU Health Technology Assessment Regulation. AI may be used to identify studies, extract data, assess the risk of bias, analyse evidence and prepare reports.

The group recognises that AI could improve the efficiency of evidence preparation but warns that inadequate oversight may compromise completeness, methodological quality and scientific rigour.

Health technology developers will remain fully responsible for the content, methods and conclusions of submitted dossiers, including decisions on whether AI is used, how it contributes to evidence synthesis and whether its outputs are scientifically valid.

Human oversight must be maintained throughout every AI-assisted stage, and no part of the assessment process should be fully automated without a clearly accountable individual.

Any AI-assisted step must be disclosed in the dossier, including information retrieval, study screening, data extraction, risk-of-bias assessment, evidence analysis and report preparation. Developers must also identify the AI tools used, including their name, version, developer and intended purpose.

Where commercial tools have been adapted, those modifications should be described, while prompts must be retained and made available during assessments on request.

The principles also require AI use to comply with applicable copyright, data protection and EU AI Act requirements, particularly given that submitted dossiers may later be published.

Why does it matter?

AI could accelerate the preparation and review of clinical evidence, but undisclosed automation or inaccurate outputs could influence decisions on which medicines and health technologies reach patients. By requiring human accountability, methodological transparency and disclosure of AI tools and prompts, the EU is seeking to preserve the scientific integrity of health technology assessments.

The principles also represent an early example of sector-specific AI governance under the EU’s broader regulatory framework. Rather than restricting AI use, they establish conditions for trustworthy deployment, illustrating how transparency and human oversight are becoming central requirements for AI-assisted decision-making in highly regulated fields.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Report urges Hong Kong to strengthen AI adoption strategy

Hong Kong should draw on the experiences of Singapore and the United Kingdom to accelerate AI adoption, according to research published by the Legislative Council Secretariat.

Although Hong Kong has identified AI as a priority industry, it has yet to adopt a standalone economy-wide AI strategy. A 2025 survey found that only around 2% of local organisations were fully prepared for AI, compared with a global average of 13%.

Hong Kong ranked 20th in the International Monetary Fund’s AI Preparedness Index, behind Singapore, Japan, South Korea and the UK. While it scored highly for digital infrastructure and innovation, it ranked considerably lower in human capital, labour policy, regulation and ethics.

The report identifies fragmented governance, limited in-house expertise and insufficient computing capacity as major barriers. Around 44% of Hong Kong businesses reportedly struggled to secure adequate processing power, while many, particularly smaller firms, lacked support for redesigning workflows and integrating legacy data systems.

Singapore has addressed these barriers through coordinated funding, diagnostics and technical assistance. Grants subsidise approved AI tools, while government programmes connect businesses with consultants, engineers and major cloud providers. By October 2025, its Enterprise Compute Initiative had linked around 1,000 companies with cloud partners.

However, the report notes that Singapore also faces challenges in moving from experimentation to widespread organisational transformation. AI adoption reached 62.5% among larger companies and 14.5% among SMEs in 2024, yet only 4% of firms had integrated AI into their core business processes by 2026.

The UK has concentrated support on SMEs and traditionally less digitised sectors through programmes such as BridgeAI and Made Smarter, which combine funding with mentoring, diagnostics, training and technical collaboration. Business use of AI increased from 9.4% in September 2023 to 25.9% in March 2026, with particularly strong growth in construction, transport and manufacturing.

Both Singapore and the UK have also expanded computing infrastructure. Singapore combines cloud credits with technical support, while the UK is investing in public supercomputers and regional AI Growth Zones, which had attracted £28.2 billion in planned investment by January 2026.

The report concludes that accelerating AI adoption will require more than financial incentives. A coordinated approach combining affordable computing, technical support, workforce development and assistance with business transformation could help organisations move from isolated AI pilots to widespread operational use.

Why does it matter?

The report highlights that digital infrastructure alone is not enough to drive AI adoption. Countries that combine funding with technical assistance, workforce development, computing capacity and coordinated governance appear better positioned to translate AI investment into measurable productivity gains.

For Hong Kong, the findings suggest that competitiveness will depend less on access to AI technologies than on the ability of businesses, particularly SMEs, to integrate them into everyday operations. The report therefore reinforces a broader international trend towards AI adoption policies that emphasise implementation alongside innovation.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

ONS reports growing concern about AI in Great Britain

Public concern about AI is growing across Great Britain, with more adults believing its risks outweigh its benefits, according to new data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS).

The survey found that 38% of adults believed AI’s risks outweighed its benefits, up from 25% in August 2024. Only 13% said the benefits outweighed the risks, while 43% considered them broadly balanced.

Despite growing concerns, 36% of respondents said AI would benefit them personally, although 27% disagreed, the highest share recorded since the ONS began asking the question in November 2023. Younger adults remained considerably more optimistic than older respondents.

Misinformation, privacy and security emerged as the public’s main concerns. Around 81% of respondents believed AI would make fake information harder to identify, 77% worried personal data could be used without consent and 63% expected greater exposure to cybercrime.

Nearly half of adults under 50 also believed AI could threaten their jobs, while trust remained very low for high-impact uses such as government decision-making (4%) and caregiving (5%).

Public concern contrasted with more limited expectations of personal benefit. While respondents identified education, workplace assistance and household support as AI’s main advantages, 41% said the technology would have no positive impact on their own lives.

Why does it matter?

The findings suggest that public acceptance of AI is becoming a key governance challenge alongside technological development. Growing concerns about misinformation, privacy, cybersecurity and employment could make citizens less willing to embrace AI unless governments and companies demonstrate that effective safeguards are in place.

The survey also highlights a widening gap between rapid AI deployment and public confidence. As AI becomes more deeply integrated into public services and everyday life, trust, transparency and accountability may prove just as important as technical capability in determining how quickly the technology is adopted.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

OECD urges stronger governance as GenAI transforms higher education

The OECD has called for a more responsible and systematic approach to generative AI (GenAI) in higher education, warning that institutional policies, governance and support have failed to keep pace with the technology’s rapid adoption.

Its latest Education Spotlight finds that GenAI has moved from novelty to near-universal use among students. In the UK, undergraduate use rose from 66% in early 2024 to 95% in 2026, while comparable surveys found adoption above 90% among German students.

Across the EU, an average of 72% of students reported using GenAI during the previous three months in 2025, including 53% for formal education, although adoption ranged from almost 90% in Estonia to just over half in Türkiye.

Academic staff are also adopting GenAI, although at a slower pace. Globally, 61% of academics across 28 countries reported using it weekly, but only 17% considered themselves advanced or expert users. Most use remains focused on routine tasks such as drafting, editing, summarising and preparing teaching materials.

Adoption also varies by discipline, with science, engineering and business generally reporting greater confidence and use than the arts and humanities, while differences remain across gender, socio-economic background and institutional resources.

The diagram on page 4 maps GenAI use across teaching, learning, research, administration, student services and institutional management. Applications range from personalised learning materials and research coding to student support, regulatory compliance and large-scale analysis of internal documents.

The OECD warns that institutional governance has not kept pace with widespread adoption. Many students and staff continue to rely on free consumer AI tools because universities have yet to provide secure institutional alternatives. In the UK, only 38% of institutions actively provided GenAI tools to students in 2026, although this represented a significant increase from 9% two years earlier.

Governance is also lagging. A UNESCO survey found that only 19% of participating institutions had adopted formal AI policies, while a further 42% were still developing them. According to the OECD, this leaves students and staff to make individual decisions on issues such as privacy, copyright, ethics and appropriate academic use.

To support responsible adoption, the OECD identifies five priority policy areas: guidance for responsible use, coordinated compliance and procurement, AI skills development, evidence gathering through evaluation, and support for specialised educational tools.

Examples include national guidance in Australia, Ireland and Finland; shared procurement in France and the Netherlands; staff training in Germany, South Korea and Switzerland; and controlled pilot programmes to evaluate educational outcomes.

The report recommends guaranteeing access to devices, connectivity and secure AI tools, investing in staff development, enforcing privacy and safety standards, supporting research and maintaining meaningful human oversight alongside non-AI alternatives.

Why does it matter?

The report suggests that higher education has entered a new phase in which widespread GenAI use is no longer the primary challenge. Instead, universities and governments must determine how to integrate the technology in ways that strengthen learning while protecting academic integrity, privacy and equity.

The OECD also argues that effective AI adoption requires institutional governance rather than individual experimentation. Secure platforms, clear policies, staff training and evidence-based evaluation will increasingly determine whether GenAI enhances education or simply accelerates existing inequalities and weakens critical thinking.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

South Korea strengthens investigations into AI and semiconductor technology leaks

South Korea has restructured its specialised intellectual property investigation system to strengthen efforts against leaks of advanced technologies, including semiconductors and AI, amid growing concerns over economic security.

The reforms establish new investigative and analytical divisions while expanding the technology police force from 27 to 61 officers.

A new Technology Divulgence Police Division will investigate trade secret theft and the leakage of advanced technologies. Its 21 investigators will include specialists in electrical, chemical and mechanical engineering alongside patent examiners, attorneys and other technical experts.

The government also plans to expand investigative authority to cover violations involving National Core Technologies and National High-Tech Strategic Technologies.

A separate Intellectual Property Protection Analysis Division will use patent data and other intelligence to identify technologies, companies and institutions at high risk of technology leakage.

It will also cooperate with businesses, research organisations and law enforcement agencies to detect warning signs, support intelligence-led investigations and strengthen security awareness, particularly among smaller companies.

The restructuring creates an Intellectual Property Protection Standards Division responsible for investigative procedures, oversight and human rights safeguards.

Planned reforms in South Korea include clearer rules for compulsory investigations, external review through a Criminal Investigation Review Committee, stronger access to legal counsel, wider use of video recording and regular updates for parties involved in investigations.

Why does it matter?

As geopolitical competition increasingly centres on semiconductors, AI and other strategic technologies, governments are treating intellectual property protection as a matter of economic and national security. South Korea’s reforms aim to strengthen its ability to detect, investigate and prevent technology leakage before commercially valuable innovations are transferred abroad.

The restructuring also reflects a broader trend towards combining specialised technical expertise with intelligence-led enforcement and stronger procedural safeguards. This approach seeks to improve both the effectiveness and accountability of investigations involving advanced technologies.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

European Commission orders Google to open Android and Search under DMA

The European Commission has issued two legally binding specification decisions requiring Google to improve interoperability for competing AI assistants on Android and to share anonymised Google Search data with eligible third-party search providers.

The decisions clarify how Google must comply with its obligations under the Digital Markets Act (DMA) and are intended to strengthen competition in AI assistant and search markets.

Under the Android decision, competing AI assistants will gain access to functions currently available primarily to Google’s own services, including Gemini. European users will be able to activate alternative assistants through voice commands, perform actions within apps, receive suggested replies and ask questions based on recent activity.

The Commission said the measures include safeguards to protect privacy, security and device integrity.

The second decision requires Google to make anonymised search data available under clearer and more effective conditions. Eligible recipients will include AI chatbots offering search functionality, while Google must share the same categories of anonymised data it uses to improve its own search services.

The framework also establishes a multi-layered anonymisation process, allows Google to address serious cybersecurity and data protection risks, and introduces transparent procedures for data access and pricing.

Google must begin sharing search data with eligible providers from January 2027, while the Android interoperability measures are expected to benefit users from July 2027. Although the decisions are legally binding, they do not determine whether Google has breached the DMA or impose financial penalties. They remain subject to judicial review.

Why does it matter?

The decisions represent one of the clearest examples so far of how the Digital Markets Act is intended to reshape competition in digital ecosystems. By requiring Google to open key Android features and search data to rivals, the Commission is seeking to reduce barriers for competing AI assistants and search providers while expanding consumer choice.

The measures also demonstrate that DMA enforcement extends beyond preventing anti-competitive conduct to prescribing how gatekeepers must implement interoperability and data-sharing obligations in practice. Similar specification decisions could shape how other major digital platforms comply with the Act in the future.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

EU orders Google to open Android AI features

The European Commission has issued two sets of binding measures under the Digital Markets Act requiring Google to improve competition in AI assistants and online search.

The first decision requires Google to give competing AI services access to 11 key Android features on terms equivalent to those available to its own services, including Gemini.

Users will be able to activate their preferred AI assistant via voice commands and have it to perform tasks across apps, such as sending messages, booking services, or retrieving contextual information.

Alternative providers will also gain access to features covering device context, background execution, on-device models, system integration and automated actions, subject to user consent and security safeguards.

Google must implement most of the measures in Android 18 and no later than 1 August 2027. Concurrent voice activation for multiple AI assistants must be introduced with Android 19 by August 2028.

The second decision requires Google to share anonymised search data with eligible third-party search engines, including AI chatbots that provide online search functions.

The data may include queries, rankings, clicks and views that Google uses to improve its own search service. Recipients may use it to develop search technology, improve retrieval and ground AI-generated answers in current online information.

The measures do not require Google to share its search algorithms, and recipients cannot use the data to train general-purpose AI models or for advertising and consumer profiling.

Google must also establish a transparent application process and a pricing model based primarily on the costs of providing access.

The Commission said the measures are intended to expand consumer choice and prevent Google’s advantages in Android and search from limiting competition in AI services.

Why does it matter?

The decisions apply established DMA interoperability and data-access rules directly to the emerging AI market. Rival assistants could gain deeper access to Android, while search providers and AI chatbots may use Google’s data to improve retrieval and compete more effectively. The measures could lower barriers created by control over operating systems and search data, although implementation will require careful protection of privacy, cybersecurity and commercially sensitive information.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our chatbot!

Greece adopts national framework to implement EU AI Act

The Greek Parliament has approved the national implementing framework for the EU AI Act, making Greece one of the first member states to establish a comprehensive national system for enforcing the regulation.

The new law in Greece establishes the institutional framework for supervising AI systems, coordinating enforcement, supporting innovation and ensuring compliance with the EU AI Act.

The legislation designates the Hellenic Data Protection Authority (HDPA) as the central market surveillance authority and the Hellenic Telecommunications and Post Commission (EETT) as the notifying authority, while establishing a dedicated AI Coordination and Expertise Centre.

It also introduces complaint procedures, administrative sanctions, a national registry of AI systems used by public authorities, regulatory sandboxes for AI testing and criminal penalties for removing transparency labels from deepfake content.

Alongside the implementing framework, the government presented its broader national AI strategy, highlighting investments in infrastructure, data governance and research. These include the Daedalus supercomputer, the Pharos AI Factory, new high-performance computing infrastructure in Kozani, the data.gov.gr platform and partnerships with companies such as Mistral and ElevenLabs, which the government said will strengthen Greece’s AI capabilities and technological sovereignty.

The government said these initiatives form part of a coordinated strategy to strengthen Greece’s AI capabilities and technological sovereignty.

The minister also highlighted current and planned AI applications across the public sector, including tools to accelerate legal reviews at the Hellenic Cadastre and improve public access to parliamentary work through AI services for the Hellenic Parliament.

Additional provisions include the creation of a digital registry for accessibility infrastructure, which will integrate with the MyStreet application to improve mobility for people with disabilities.

Why does it matter?

The legislation gives Greece the institutional architecture needed to implement the EU AI Act while combining regulatory oversight with investment in AI infrastructure and innovation. By establishing supervisory authorities, regulatory sandboxes and governance mechanisms alongside major computing and data initiatives, Greece is seeking to align AI regulation with industrial and digital development.

The framework also illustrates how implementation of the AI Act is becoming a national governance exercise rather than simply a compliance task. As member states designate authorities and build supporting institutions, national implementation strategies are likely to shape how consistently the Act is applied across the EU.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!