Snapshot: The developments that made waves
AI governance
California Governor Gavin Newsom has signed Assembly Bill 3030 (AB 3030) into law, which will regulate the use of generative AI (GenAI) in healthcare.
The Irish Data Protection Commission (DPC) is awaiting guidance from the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) on handling AI-related privacy issues under the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
The EU Council, along with its member states, has adopted a declaration for the first time on this specific topic establishing a unified understanding of how international law applies to cyberspace.
Michael O’Flaherty, the Council of Europe’s new Commissioner for Human Rights, warned that failing to support Ukraine would be an ‘existential loss’ for Europe, while also highlighting the need for stronger AI regulations to protect human rights in the face of emerging technologies.
Technologies
Samsung has teamed up with Google and Qualcomm to develop advanced AI-powered smart glasses, set for release in Q3 2025. Initial production will feature 500,000 units, targeting a competitive edge over existing options like Meta’s and Ray-Ban’s smart glasses.
A new studio, Promise, has been launched to revolutionise filmmaking with the use of generative AI. Backed by venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz and former News Corp President Peter Chernin, the startup is setting its sights on blending AI with Hollywood storytelling.
Meta has started rolling out AI capabilities for its Ray-Ban Meta AR glasses in France, Italy, and Spain. Users in these countries can now access Meta AI, the company’s voice-activated assistant, which supports French, Italian, and Spanish alongside English.
OpenAI is shifting away from the ‘bigger is better’ philosophy for training models. Instead, it is developing techniques that allow algorithms to ‘think’ in more human-like ways. Its new model, o1, uses a technique called ‘test-time compute’, allowing it to consider multiple answers and choose the best option during use.
California’s sole remaining nuclear power plant, Diablo Canyon, is adopting AI to navigate the complex challenges of staying operational. Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) has partnered with Atomic Canyon, a local startup, to deploy an AI system called Neutron Enterprise.
President Joe Biden and China’s President Xi Jinping held a two-hour meeting on the sidelines of the APEC summit on Saturday. Both leaders reached a significant agreement to prevent AI from controlling nuclear weapons systems and made progress on securing the release of two US citizens wrongfully detained in China.
Infrastructure
The UN Development Programme (UNDP) has partnered with cBrain, a Danish digital solutions provider, to accelerate Africa’s digital transformation. The collaboration focuses on bridging the digital divide, fostering inclusive growth, and strengthening community resilience across the continent.
President-elect Donald Trump has nominated Brendan Carr to lead the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Carr, an FCC commissioner since 2017, is a familiar figure within the administration and has aligned his policy views with Trump’s conservative agenda, particularly concerning free speech and deregulation.
Cybersecurity
Hackers with alleged links to China have stolen sensitive data from US telecommunications firms, targeting information intended for law enforcement agencies.
British businesses have lost an estimated £44 billion ($55 billion) in revenue over the past five years due to cyberattacks, with more than half of private sector companies experiencing at least one incident, according to a report by insurance broker Howden.
According to Morgan Adamski, executive director of US Cyber Command, Chinese hackers are embedding themselves in US critical infrastructure IT networks to prepare for a potential conflict with the United States.
The UN Office for Disarmament Affairs (ODA) will conduct a simulation exercise in early 2025 to help Member States engage with the Global Points of Contact (POC) Directory. The directory ensures quick and effective responses to cybersecurity incidents by providing a reliable channel for diplomatic and technical contacts across countries.
The UN Cybercrime Convention is moving closer to a full vote in the General Assembly following its approval at a recent meeting. Despite significant opposition from the private sector, civil society, and US congressional members, the United States and the United Kingdom defended their support of the treaty.
Digital rights
A United States federal appeals court is set to rule by 6 December on whether ByteDance, TikTok‘s Chinese parent company, must divest its US operations or face a ban.
The US Department of Justice (DOJ) alleges that Alphabet’s Google unfairly monopolised key markets, including ad servers and advertiser networks, as well as attempting to dominate ad exchanges.
Legal
Japan’s Fair Trade Commission has raided Amazon Japan over allegations of anti-monopoly violations. A government source revealed that the company is suspected of pressuring sellers to reduce prices in exchange for favourable product placement on its e-commerce platform.
Google has announced further changes to its search results in Europe in response to complaints from smaller competitors and looming the EU antitrust charges under the Digital Markets Act (DMA).
The United States Department of Justice (DOJ) is pushing for Alphabet’s Google to divest its Chrome browser, escalating efforts to curb the company’s alleged monopolistic practices in digital markets.
Internet economy
Jay Clayton, former Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) chair, predicts that cryptocurrency legislation could be on the horizon during Donald Trump’s upcoming administration.
The Blockchain Association has sent a letter to president-elect Donald Trump and Congress, outlining key reforms for the crypto industry during the first 100 days of Trump’s administration.
Australia is seeking advice from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to shape its approach to taxing digital assets.
Development
The UN Development Programme (UNDP) has partnered with cBrain, a Danish digital solutions provider, to accelerate Africa’s digital transformation. The collaboration focuses on bridging the digital divide, fostering inclusive growth, and strengthening community resilience across the continent.
Sociocultural
OpenAI, in partnership with Common Sense Media, has introduced a free training course aimed at helping teachers understand AI and prompt engineering.
In Poznan, Poland, a new chapel is combining tradition with cutting-edge technology. Created by priest Radek Rakowski, the modern chapel features an AI-powered system that answers visitors’ questions about Catholicism.
Australia has approved the law which bans children under 16 from accessing social media, following a contentious debate. The new regulation targets major tech companies like Meta, TikTok, and Snapchat, which will face fines of up to A$49.5 million if they allow minors to log in.
Trump’s victory in US elections and the US tech future
Donald Trump’s return to the White House probably signals a relevant shift in tech policy, given his strategic alignment with influential figures in Silicon Valley, most notably Elon Musk. Musk, a vocal supporter and one of the wealthiest individuals on the planet, invested approximately $120 million into Trump’s campaign, clearly showing his commitment to Trump’s vision for a tech-forward, market-driven America. Trump has vowed to appoint Musk to head a government efficiency commission, suggesting an unprecedented partnership between the government and private tech giants.
Trump’s ambitions in the tech arena are sweeping. He has promised a regulatory environment to ‘set free’ companies burdened by government intervention. By rolling back regulations on AI, social media, and cryptocurrency sectors, Trump aims to foster innovation by reducing oversight and promoting a more liberal market. This policy stance starkly contrasts the Biden administration’s regulatory approach, particularly in Big Tech antitrust and AI oversight, which Trump’s team views as stifling growth and innovation.
A key part of Trump’s tech agenda is his stance on digital freedom. He has consistently criticised social media platforms for what he claims is censorship of conservative voices, a sentiment echoed by Musk, especially since his acquisition of Twitter (now X). Under Trump’s leadership, there are likely to be pushes to reform Section 230, the law that protects platforms from liability for user-generated content, aiming to curb what Trump views as ‘biased censorship’ against his supporters. This approach aligns with Trump’s free-market ethos and reflects his desire to reshape the digital public square to favour unrestricted speech.
Moreover, the Government Efficiency Commission would conduct a complete financial and performance audit of the federal government. Trump also pledged to cut corporate tax rates for domestically manufactured companies, establish ‘low-tax’ zones on federal lands, encourage construction companies to build new homes and start a sovereign wealth fund. Trump’s proposal drew criticism from Everett Kelley, president of the American Federation of Government Employees, who accused Trump and Musk of wanting to weaken the nonpartisan civil service.
As Trump reclaims his influence over tech policy, his administration is expected to reassess past conflicts with Silicon Valley. Despite his previous clashes with leaders like Mark Zuckerberg, Trump’s recent statements have indicated a willingness to mend fences, especially with executives prioritising business over political engagement. For instance, Zuckerberg’s current stance of neutrality has met with Trump’s approval, signifying a potential thaw in relations that could lead to an era of cooperation rather than confrontation.
In this new chapter, Trump’s alliance with Musk and other tech elites underscores his ambition to create a tech policy that minimises governmental control while encouraging private innovation. Together, Trump and Musk represent a fusion of populism and technology, a partnership that could reshape America’s role in the global tech landscape, steering it towards a future where corporate influence on policy is stronger than ever.
The growing influence of Chinese tech firms
Chinese tech companies have emerged as critical players in the global technology landscape, with companies like Alibaba, Tencent, Baidu, ByteDance, and Huawei shaping industries across e-commerce, AI, telecommunications, and more. These firms have become central to China’s digital economy and are increasingly competing with US tech giants like Apple and Google on the global stage. Their rise has been bolstered by China’s strategic support and policies designed to foster technological innovation, often with a focus on state-led initiatives and protectionism.
The growing competition between China and the US in the tech sector is one of the defining geopolitical struggles of the 21st century. This rivalry encompasses cooperation and confrontation, with regulatory policies, national security concerns, and shifting political priorities influencing the dynamics of the tech war. While market forces drive the competition between the two tech powerhouses, it is also deeply entwined with broader geopolitical tensions.
A critical factor in the rise of Chinese tech companies has been the Chinese government’s regulatory strategies. In the early 2000s, China introduced the Golden Shield Project, designed to control media and information flow within the country while blocking foreign tech firms that did not comply with its data regulations. This led to a unique digital ecosystem where domestic companies thrived without significant competition from Western players, allowing the so-called BATX companies (Baidu, Alibaba, Tencent, Xiaomi) to dominate the market.
The major Chinese tech companies—Alibaba, Tencent, Baidu, ByteDance, Huawei, Xiaomi, JD.com, Meituan, Pinduoduo, and Didi Chuxing—have each carved out significant roles in domestic and global markets. For instance, Alibaba leads the e-commerce space with platforms like Taobao, Tmall, and AliExpress, while Tencent dominates social media and gaming with WeChat and major stakes in companies like Riot Games and Activision Blizzard. Baidu, often called China’s Google, has expanded into AI and autonomous vehicles, and ByteDance, the parent company of TikTok, has revolutionised short-form video content. Meanwhile, Huawei remains a telecommunications and 5G infrastructure leader despite geopolitical challenges.
China’s strategy for fostering tech growth involves broad investments in state-owned enterprises and private startups. Government-led initiatives such as ‘Made in China 2025‘ and the ‘Thousand Talents Plan‘ have provided financial backing and attracted top global talent to drive AI, robotics, and semiconductors innovation. While this strategy has yielded impressive results, critics argue that it creates an uneven playing field by providing domestic companies with unfair advantages, including subsidies and protectionist measures that foreign competitors cannot access.
China’s regulatory model for tech is marked by a top-down approach, with central leadership exerting control over the actions of tech companies. Angela Zhang’s ‘dynamic pyramid model’ describes this system as hierarchical, volatile, and fragile. While regulators have allowed tech firms to flourish during periods of lenient oversight, rapid interventions and crackdowns—such as those seen in 2020—often result in market instability and significant financial losses for companies. These fluctuations highlight the unpredictability of China’s regulatory environment and have led to concerns about the long-term viability of businesses operating under such a system.
The shifting regulatory environment, exemplified by the Chinese government’s actions against firms like Alibaba and Tencent, underscores the challenges tech companies face in China. While the government seeks to address issues like antitrust violations and data security, its heavy-handed approach can stifle innovation and create uncertainty in the market. These regulatory cycles, where intense crackdowns follow periods of lax oversight, often undermine investor confidence and can dampen the growth of the very industries the government seeks to strengthen.
In response to the rapid rise of Chinese tech firms, the US has taken a more aggressive stance toward China, particularly under the Trump administration. The US has expanded export controls, blocklisting Chinese firms like Huawei and restricting critical technology exports. Additionally, tariffs have been imposed on Chinese imports, further intensifying the trade and tech conflict. Experts predict that under Trump’s leadership, the US will continue to pressure China by adding more companies to the US Entity List, which restricts American firms from selling to blocked entities. This strategy aims to limit China’s access to advanced technologies and slow its progress in AI and semiconductors.
China has retaliated against US actions by targeting American companies like Micron Technology and restricting the export of essential materials for chipmaking and electric vehicle production. These retaliatory measures underscore the interconnectedness of both economies, with the US still relying on China for critical resources such as rare earth elements. This dependency and the ongoing tech conflict have tense the situation as both countries seek to protect their national interests in emerging technologies.
The growing tensions between China and the US are not just about trade—they reflect deeper concerns about data security, military dominance, and leadership in AI and semiconductors. Both countries strive for dominance in these critical technologies, as they hold the potential to shape the future of global power. The outcome of this tech conflict will have far-reaching implications for global supply chains, innovation, and the geopolitical balance of power.
In the face of these challenges, Chinese tech companies are increasingly looking to expand overseas, navigating complex regulatory environments while continuing to grow their influence in global markets. Despite resistance in the US and other Western countries, these firms are capitalising on emerging markets and leveraging their competitive advantages, particularly in AI and telecommunications. While the US has sought to limit China’s technological ascent, Chinese companies continue to gain ground in key sectors, making the tech rivalry between the two nations one of the most significant global issues of the 21st century.
The rise of Chinese tech companies has reshaped the global tech landscape, driving innovation and competition in critical industries. The rivalry between China and the US has become a defining feature of international geopolitics, with both nations vying for technological supremacy. As Chinese tech firms expand globally and navigate complex regulatory environments, the outcome of this tech conflict will have profound implications for the future of global technology and innovation. The increasing interdependence of the two economies and the ongoing tensions will continue to shape the dynamics of the worldwide tech industry.
UN Cybercrime Convention: What does it mean, and how will it impact all of us?
The UN adopted the draft of the first globally binding cybercrime convention, following years of negotiations led by Russia since 2017. This treaty, expected to be formally adopted by the UN General Assembly later this year, aims to establish international legal frameworks to combat cybercrime. While the convention promises cross-border cooperation and mutual legal assistance in the fight against cybercrime, it has faced significant opposition from human rights groups, civil society, and tech companies, who have expressed concerns about the potential for increased surveillance and the erosion of personal freedoms.
One of the primary goals of the UN Cybercrime Convention is to facilitate cooperation between member states by offering a legal framework for mutual legal assistance requests in cybercrime cases. The treaty also seeks to harmonise criminal provisions related to cybercrime across nations, creating a more unified approach to the global threat of cybercrime. However, while the Convention promises significant steps toward international cooperation, it does not introduce new data protection standards or change the existing human rights safeguards for law enforcement and cooperation measures.
The UN Convention was particularly inspired by the Budapest Convention and, therefore, will not exclude the application of other existing international or regional instruments, nor will it take precedence over them. Countries parties to the UN Cybercrime Convention and regional conventions, such as the Malabo Convention in Africa, can choose which instrument offers a more specific basis for cooperation. Introducing new provisions in the UN Convention, like criminalising non-consensual dissemination of intimate images, marks one of its novel contributions. However, many experts agree that existing regional agreements remain crucial due to their detailed cybersecurity and national policy provisions.
A vital element of the Convention is Article 27, which addresses cross-border cooperation, particularly around access to electronic evidence. This provision allows states to compel individuals within their borders to provide data stored domestically or abroad if they have access to it. However, concerns have arisen regarding the potential for states to access data across borders without the host country’s consent, a contentious issue in cybercrime law. The Convention emphasises state sovereignty and encourages cooperation through mutual legal assistance mechanisms rather than unilateral actions. While some states worry that this might bypass formal procedures, the Convention stresses respecting sovereignty while enabling international cooperation.
The Convention also addresses the issue of how individuals and entities can challenge law enforcement data requests. The treaty includes provisions for judicial review of data requests, ensuring that law enforcement must justify their actions, including the scope and duration of data access. These safeguards are designed to prevent abuses while providing law enforcement access to data crucial for investigating cybercrime. However, some experts caution that while the Convention sets a high bar for human rights protections, its effectiveness will depend on how countries implement these standards at the domestic level.
Defining and protecting ‘electronic data’ has been one of the most debated aspects of the treaty. The Convention establishes electronic data broadly, covering all types of stored digital information, including personal documents, photos, and notes. This broad definition allows states to request access to electronic data, even if it contains private information. The Convention emphasises that while such data can be accessed for law enforcement purposes, domestic legal frameworks must provide safeguards to protect individual privacy and uphold human rights. Including protections for personal data during international transfers adds a layer of security for individuals.
Technical assistance and capacity development are fundamental aspects of the UN Cybercrime Convention, which lays the groundwork for strengthening countries’ capabilities to fight cybercrime. The Convention provides mechanisms such as Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) and personnel exchanges to support the development of law enforcement and judicial capacities in tackling cybercrime. It also encourages multilateral and bilateral agreements to implement technical assistance and capacity development provisions.
Looking forward, the Convention’s text uses technology-neutral language to ensure it remains relevant as technology evolves. Unlike specific treaties focusing on particular technologies, the UN Convention prioritises behaviours and actions, allowing it to stay adaptable over time. The Convention includes provisions for amendments five years after its implementation, ensuring that it can respond to emerging cyber threats and technological advancements.
Despite initial scepticism regarding its feasibility, the Convention’s current momentum demonstrates the potential for international cooperation to address cybercrime. Experts agree that multistakeholder participation, including civil society, NGOs, and the private sector, is essential for ensuring a comprehensive and effective implementation process. Public-private partnerships will be crucial in building trust and collaboration in cybercrime prevention, fostering a more secure cyberspace for all.
Ultimately, the UN Cybercrime Convention marks a significant step toward addressing the global challenge of cybercrime. While introducing critical new measures, particularly in cross-border cooperation and the protection of human rights, its success will ultimately depend on how effectively countries implement its provisions and safeguard individual rights. The treaty’s adoption will likely spur further discussions and refinements, particularly in addressing the evolving nature of cybercrime and balancing the need for security with protecting civil liberties.
