Silicon Valley seems to have panicked. The discourse on artificial intelligence has been filled with apocalyptic omens that, suddenly, eclipse any other debate surrounding the reality of these technological oligopolies that have transformed power dynamics on a global scale. An unbridled sector, enlarged by the philosophy of acceleration and development without restrictions or regard –its famous “move fast and break things” (move fast and break things)– now clashes with the unexpected consequences of its own innovation.
Just a few months ago, when Anthropic began to denounce —practically alone— the dangers posed by unregulated AI and refused to have its models used in Pentagon wars, the Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, tried to retaliate by labeling the company a national security risk. Last July, however, more than 1,200 workers from cutting-edge AI companies signed a public petition demanding that the United States government support international efforts to develop technical and governance tools to regulate the pace of automated AI development.
It took a few more incidents for Elon Musk or Sam Altman, CEO of ChatGPT, to suddenly sign up for caution. It is not just about the future of civilization, but their own power. The uncertainty goes beyond the feeling of losing control over the technology itself. Also added to this is the technological success of China, which views this sudden change in discourse with suspicion. Furthermore, there is the social unrest that has begun to mobilize, within the United States itself, against the environmental costs of data centers or due to the legal and judicial limits that threaten a business model built on the hoarding and monetization of users and data. All this in a polarized scenario that points to political changes on the horizon. Voting intention polls for the upcoming midterm elections in November give a Democratic majority in the House of Representatives and a high probability that they could also win the Senate.
For Donald Trump, everything is the result of a “sick conspiracy” against AI and data centers. The reality is that the United States economy's dependence on AI infrastructure investments has become a structural weakness for a Trump who is more worried about the bubble bursting in the short term and falling behind in the technological race with China than about the future of humanity.
The problem is that now it is Silicon Valley itself, which accompanied—and financed—his return to power, that is asking him for regulation. Or, at the very least, looking for accomplices so as not to lose control of the regulatory debate.
During Biden's presidency, Washington tried to pass some preventive measures regarding AI. At that time, in Brussels, sources from the European Commission proudly explained how the Democratic administration was asking them to move forward with regulation because they could not.
At the end of 2023, leaders from all over the world, the United Nations, and major global technology companies met at Bletchley Park, at the same English estate where a group of Allied experts dedicated themselves to deciphering secret codes during the Second World War, to discuss AI governance.
Since then, however, technology—and its military use—has accelerated, and the will to set limits has receded. In fact, one of Donald Trump's first decisions upon his return to the White House was to eliminate the coordination bodies and measures approved by his predecessor. And once again, Ursula von der Leyen chose the wrong strategy. Brussels hit the brakes on its own regulation, pressured by the millionaire lobby of big tech companies and by the White House itself.
Despite everything, reality has taken it upon itself to refocus the Commission's political agenda. Now Brussels sees Silicon Valley's panic as a vindication of its regulatory commitment. But, as the Italian economist Francesca Bria, an expert in technology policy, says, we cannot regulate what we do not control. The great AI giants are very aware of this and, amidst so many apocalyptic omens, they seek not to lose control over their own regulation.
