9 hours ago
1
Hello, and welcome to TechScape. This week we’ll be looking at a debate over the future of artificial intelligence that’s dividing the tech industry, as well as how the European Union gave Google a slap on the wrist for anti-competitive behavior. And we’ll also catch you up on the avalanche of lawsuits accusing social media companies of getting young people addicted to their products.
Silicon Valley’s divide over the future of AI
Over the past week some of the biggest names in tech have weighed in on a debate about the future of artificial intelligence, one which has resurged after the release of new Chinese AI models. Nvidia’s CEO Jensen Huang, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella and Elon Musk have all posted in recent days about the need for open-source AI – which, broadly speaking, refers to the types of AI models that are freely available and allow users to modify them.
“Open models strengthen safety and cybersecurity, accelerate innovation and diffusion, and enable sovereignty,” Huang said in his first ever post on X.
Huang’s post on Friday also linked to an open letter started by Microsoft that was signed by a wide range of prominent venture capital firms and tech companies including SpaceX, Nvidia, Palantir and Andreessen Horowitz. The letter argued that open models were necessary for “creating opportunities for innovation and prosperity across the country” and that the tech industry, as well as the US government, should embrace them.
Notably absent from the letter was Anthropic, which has taken the other side in the debate. The company has long argued that open-source AI is dangerous because it is harder to regulate and put safety guardrails on than proprietary models like their Claude chatbot. OpenAI, which did sign Microsoft’s letter, has also made similar arguments in the past. Last week, Dean Ball, the head of strategic futures at OpenAI, warned on X that embracing an open-source policy would benefit China and could lead to “full AI communism”.
Both sides in this fight also have clear economic incentives for where they land on open-source AI. Venture capital firms have been concerned about the rising AI costs to businesses, while chip companies like Nvidia benefit from more widespread demand for their products. Anthropic and OpenAI, meanwhile, have developed a sizable lead over other frontier AI firms in the US, and cheaper, more easily accessible open-source models present an obvious challenge to their dominance.
The debate over the benefits and drawbacks of open-source AI has been a longstanding issue in the tech industry, but what’s bringing it to a head this month is the release of a new Chinese AI open source model that can compete with some of the best American-made counterparts. The model, called Kimi K3, has rattled Silicon Valley and the White House as executives and officials argue how to respond.
Just as the tech industry is split on open models, the Trump administration is similarly divided. Treasury secretary Scott Bessent last week accused the Chinese models of stealing US intellectual property to create their products, claiming the White House could sanction foreign AI labs. Now, the administration appears to be unable to agree on whether to impose restrictions on Chinese products, like Kimi K3, or whether to keep the status quo since some American companies have become reliant on these cheaper models.
After a jury delivered a bruising loss to Meta and YouTube in March, finding the companies liable for inflicting harm on young people, the tech firms have since avoided going back to court. Another lawsuit in a series of thousands of cases over social media addiction and harm to children was slated to go to trial in Los Angeles on Monday, but at the 11th hour the two sides brokered deals.
The case was brought by a 15-year-old boy from Florida with the initials RKC. He said he started using social media when he was about eight, and quickly became addicted. He lost sleep and suffered from depression and anxiety, according to court filings. His lawsuit was filed against YouTube, TikTok, Snap and Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram.
YouTube, TikTok and Snap settled with RKC over the past few weeks. (TikTok and Snap also settled in the March lawsuit). Meta came to a deal with RKC last week, in which he dropped his claims without receiving payment, the company said. While Meta called his suit “baseless”, the boy’s lawyers said he had “concerns about enduring a grueling weeks-long trial”.
Meta’s lawyers are known for aggressive tactics that dig into plaintiffs’ personal and family history. During the first trial in March, the company combed through the plaintiff’s therapy notes and called on doctors to testify about examples of personal conflict in the young woman’s life. RKC’s lawyers say he elected to withdraw his claims and “focus on his recovery and engage in therapy as he aspires to have a normal life”.
This is the second major trial that the four social media companies have circumvented since March. All of the companies settled a similar suit that was to go to trial in June. It was brought by a Kentucky school district over claims that the tech firms deliberately designed addictive products that led to children being harmed.
after newsletter promotion
But thousands more cases remain against the four companies, filed by families, school districts and state attorneys general. The first federal trial, brought by attorneys general from 29 states, is scheduled for 18 August in Oakland, California.
Separately, 42 individual states are suing Meta alone, so it hasn’t fully escaped the court room. It lost a major lawsuit to New Mexico in March with a jury ordering it to pay $375m in civil penalties. And on Monday, opening arguments began in another trial against Meta, brought by Tennessee, in which the state called the company “an addiction machine”.
Google’s slap on the wrist
The European Union fined Google about $1bn last week for violations of the Digital Markets Act, finding that the company prioritized its own services over those of competitors. The day the EU announced its decision, Google released its quarterly earnings report, which declared it had made $120bn in profits in just three months – a 24% increase that beat Wall Street expectations.
Google’s enormous earnings underscore how much of the regulatory scrutiny it faces often amounts to a slap on the wrist. The EU’s fine is a small dent in the tech behemoth’s overall profits and one that is unlikely to pose any real threat to its operations.
More concerning for Google last week was a 7% tumble in the value of its stock, which followed company executives announcing they had revised the company’s capital expenditure upwards to nearly $205bn. The company’s free cash flow, the amount of money it can reinvest after paying for operating expenses and capital expenditure, also turned negative after reaching stratospheric heights in recent years. In basic terms, Google is spending a gargantuan amount of money, more than anyone on Wall Street expected, and investors are worried it may not pay off.
Read more
EU fines Google €890m for competition breaches over search and apps
English (US) ·