German political parties split on how to regulate increasing AI adoption

27 July 2023

Cointelegraph By Veronika Rinecker

As the trilogue on the AI Act begins, the European Commission, German politicians, and digital experts express skepticism and make new demands.

In depth

Join us on social networks

In April 2021, the European Commission presented its proposal for harmonized rules on artificial intelligence (AI), dubbed the Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act). After the Council of the European Union and the European Parliament finalized their positions in December 2022 and June 2023, the legislative institutions entered a trilogue on the upcoming AI regulation.

The negotiations can be challenging due to the significant differences between the Parliament and the Council on specific issues such as biometric surveillance. In Germany, political groups and digital experts are also concerned about proposed changes to the AI Act.

Die Linke calls for stricter regulation and transparency

The German left party Die Linke highlighted significant gaps in European AI regulation, particularly regarding consumer protection, and obligations for AI providers and users.

It wants to require high-risk systems — including AI systems that pose a high risk to health, safety and the fundamental rights of natural persons — to be checked for compliance with the regulation by a supervisory authority before these AI systems are launched on the market. Die Linke has suggested that the German government appoint at least one national supervisory authority and provide sufficient financial resources to fulfill this task.

“Politics must ensure that a technology that is significant for everyone but controlled by only a few is supervised by a regulatory authority and proven trustworthy before its implementation,” said Petra Sitte, a politician from Die Linke, adding:

“Therefore, do not let yourself be blackmailed by lobbyists of big technology corporations. We can also strengthen an open-source approach in Europe […], meaning that a programming code is accessible to everyone.”

Die Linke also advocates an explicit ban on biometric identification and classification systems in public spaces, AI-driven election interference, and predictive policing systems.

According to the party, the exception for scientific AI systems specified in the AI Act should not apply if the system is used outside research institutions. Die Linke is already calling on the German government to develop training programs on the capabilities and limitations of AI systems, and to evaluate AI systems used in government operations annually “using a standardized risk classification model,” as well as registering them in an AI registry.

The Union prioritizes innovation and openness

Conversely, the center-right coalition of the Christian Democratic Union of Germany and the Christian Social Union in Bavaria — also known as “the Union” — emphasized that AI should not be overly regulated. It advocates for the federal government to prioritize AI and an innovation-friendly environment in Europe.

Regarding the trilogue negotiations, the Union noted its position paper, claiming that generative AI will enable German and European companies to excel internationally. The party wants to avoid the establishment of a large supervisory authority in Brussels, as well as differences in the implementation of the AI law in EU member states. While advocating for sharper definitions, it also suggests ensuring legal certainty by aligning with the General Data Protection Regulation, the Data Act and the Digital Markets Act.

Recent: Existential threat? Why some banks are anxious about CBDCs

The Union also makes concrete proposals to secure Germany’s technological sovereignty in AI. Recognizing the challenges of building an entirely new infrastructure in a realistic timeframe, the party recommends expanding the existing supercomputing infrastructure of the Gauss Center for Supercomputing. It also proposes that German and European startups, small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), and open-source developers be given dedicated access to this infrastructure.

To encourage the growth of German AI startups, the Union suggested such small businesses be awarded government contracts.

In addition, the Union highlighted an investment gap in university spin-offs and open-source AI, and advocated for targeted support through national initiatives such as the Sovereign Tech Fund. Given the widespread use of AI in various educational institutions, organizations and companies, the Union highlighted the urgent need to establish local systems to prevent accidental information leakage.

The German AI Association requires practical solutions

The German AI Association (KI Bundesverband), Germany’s largest industry association for AI representing more than 400 innovative SMEs, startups and entrepreneurs, also advocates for openness to innovation.

It’s here! Our new position paper on the EU’s Artificial Intelligence Act (#AIAct) highlights the key issues that need to be addressed in the upcoming #trilogue negotiations. Thanks to all our contributors! ? https://t.co/kHR5cL5VJ0 pic.twitter.com/MtbefMDlUO

— KI Bundesverband (@ki_verband)

July 4, 2023

“Europe must therefore be able to offer its own AI systems that can compete with their American or Chinese counterparts,” said J?rg Bienert, president of the KI Bundesverband. While the KI Bundesverband accepts the idea that a regulatory framework coupled with investment in AI can be a way to boost innovation, the association disagrees with the EU’s approach to this goal. Bienert believes any strategy must include three key components: mitigating potential risks, promoting domestic development, and protecting fundamental rights and European values.

According to Bienert, EU lawmakers have failed to create a regulatory framework focusing on real AI application threats and risks. He further stated that the AI Act risks becoming more of a regulation for advanced software rather than a risk-based approach. Introducing such extensive regulation after the dominance of United States and Chinese tech companies will hinder European AI companies’ chances of strengthening their position and create dependency on foreign technology.

“What is needed now are sensible and practical solutions to mitigate the real risks and threats posed by AI, not ideologically driven political quick fixes.”

Striking a balance

Germany’s government supports the AI Act but also sees further potential for improvements. Annika Einhorn, a spokesperson for the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Climate Action, told Cointelegraph, “We attach importance to striking a balance between regulation and openness to innovation, particularly in the German and European AI landscape.” The federal government will also advocate for this in the trilogue negotiations on the AI Act.

In addition to the negotiations, the federal government is already implementing numerous measures to promote German AI companies, including establishing high-performance and internationally visible research structures and, in particular, providing state-of-the-art AI and computing infrastructure at an internationally competitive level. Furthermore, during the negotiations on the AI Act, the federal government continues to advocate for “an ambitious approach” to AI testbeds. This enables innovation while also meeting the requirements of the AI Act, according to Einhorn.

Is Europe being left behind?

All these suggestions and ideas may sound promising, but the fact is that most big AI models are being developed in the U.S. and China. In light of this trend, digital experts are concerned that the German and European digital economies may fall behind. While Europe possesses significant AI expertise, the availability of computing power hinders further development.

To examine how Germany could catch up in AI, the Ministry for Economic Affairs and Climate Action commissioned a feasibility study titled “Large AI Models for Germany.”

In the study, experts argue that if Germany cannot independently develop and provide this foundational technology, German industry will have to rely on foreign services, which presents challenges regarding data protection, data security and ethical use of AI models.

The market dominance of U.S. companies in search engines, social media and cloud servers exemplifies the difficulties that can arise regarding data security and regulation. To address these difficulties, the study proposes the establishment of an AI supercomputing infrastructure in Germany, allowing for the development of large AI models and providing computing resources to smaller companies. However, specific details regarding funding and implementation remain to be determined.

“AI made in Europe”

In AI, Europe’s reliance on software and services from non-European countries is steadily increasing. According to Holger Hoos, an Alexander von Humboldt professor for AI, this poses a threat to its sovereignty, as regulation alone cannot adequately address the issue. Hoos emphasized the need for a substantial shift in the German and European AI strategies, accompanied by significant targeted public investments in the European AI landscape.

Magazine: ‘Elegant and ass-backward’: Jameson Lopp’s first impression of Bitcoin

A key aspect of this proposal is the creation of a globally recognized “CERN for AI.” This center would possess the necessary computational power, data resources and skilled personnel to facilitate cutting-edge AI research. Such a center could attract talent, foster activities and drive projects in the field of AI on a global scale, making a noteworthy contribution to the success of “AI made in Europe.” Hoos added:

“We are at a critical juncture. It requires a clear change of course, a bold effort to make AI made in Europe a success — a success that will profoundly impact our economy, society and future.”

Collect this article as an NFT to preserve this moment in history and show your support for independent journalism in the crypto space.

  

You might also like

SEC dropping XRP case was “priced in” since Trump's election: analysts  
SEC dropping XRP case was “priced in” since Trump's election: analysts  

Crypto investors rejoiced after one of the industry’s longest-standing legal battles was overturned by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, yet markets have seemingly accounted for the victory months ahead of the announcement, according to industry watchers.On March 19, Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse revealed that the SEC would dismiss its legal action against Ripple, ending four years of litigation against the blockchain developer for an alleged $1.3-billion unregistered securities offering in 2020.However, the outcome may not be as “bullish” since markets may have already priced in this development since President Trump’s election, according to Dmitrij Radin, the founder of Zekret and chief technology officer of Fideum, a regulatory and blockchain infrastructure firm focused on institutions.Ripple’s CEO said the SEC is dropping its case against the blockchain developer. Source: Brad Garlinghouse“Yes they are dropping the case but there was already the appeal,” he told Cointelegraph on the March 20 Chainreaction X show:“One of the most talked about and oldest cases in crypto has been won. It’s great for the market and Ripple as it can start its expansion in the US. But in general, it’s already priced in. I don’t see a big impact on price or the market.”XRP/USD, 1-month chart. Source: Cointelegraph Markets ProDespite an 11% relief rally after the March 19 announcement, the XRP (XRP) token is unable to remain above the key $2.5 psychological mark. The token fell over 6.3% since March 19, Cointelegraph Markets Pro data shows.Related: Crypto market’s biggest risks in 2025: US recession, circular crypto economySEC dropping Ripple case was “already expected” – Nansen analystOther analysts also attribute the XRP token’s lack of momentum to investors expecting an end to the SEC’s lawsuit against Ripple Labs, paired with generally poor market sentiment.“I’d attribute it to the market already pricing it in as well as the general market situation,” Nicolai Sondergaard, research analyst at Nansen, told Cointelegraph, adding:“It was, to be honest already expected at this point and the macro environment and general uncertainty are not doing XRP any favors.”Related: Bitcoin speculative appetite declines as investors seek safetyStill, some technical chart patterns point to a potential 75% XRP rally after the end of the SEC’s lawsuit.XRP/USD weekly price chart. Source: TradingViewAs of March 21, XRP bounced after testing the triangle’s lower trendline, eyeing a rise toward the upper trendline— around the apex point at the $2.35 level—by April. The ultimate target for this possible breakout is $4.35 by June, up 75% from the current price levels.Conversely, a drop below the lower trendline could invalidate the bullish setup, setting XRP on the path toward $1.28. The bearish target is obtained by subtracting the triangle’s maximum height from the potential breakdown point at $2.35.Despite XRP’s price trajectory, the SEC overturning the case will have a beneficial “long-term effect on the market because of the narrative change,” and investors’ expectations of a more crypto-friendly SEC, added Fideum’s Radin.Magazine: SEC’s U-turn on crypto leaves key questions unanswered

South Korea to block non-compliant crypto exchanges  
South Korea to block non-compliant crypto exchanges  

South Korean authorities are reportedly looking into blocking crypto exchange platforms that may have operated without adhering to the requirements set by the country’s financial regulator. On March 21, local media Hankyung reported that the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) of the Financial Services Commission is considering sanctions against crypto exchanges for allegedly operating in the country without reporting as an operator to the appropriate regulators. South Korean financial authorities require crypto exchanges to report to regulators as virtual asset service providers (VASPs) under the country’s Specified Financial Information Act. The FIU is investigating a list of exchanges and is conducting consultations with related agencies. The regulator is also considering sanctions, such as blocking access to the exchanges, as they begin to prepare countermeasures. South Korean regulators eye crypto exchangesThe regulator will reportedly crackdown on exchanges allegedly providing services to South Koreans without the appropriate VASP reports. The exchanges in the FIU’s list reportedly provided marketing and customer support to Korean investors without going through the country’s compliance process. Local media Hankyung mentioned that the crypto exchange KuCoin was on the list along with other crypto platforms. In a statement, a KuCoin representative told Cointelegraph: “We are closely monitoring regulatory developments across all jurisdictions, including Korea. At KuCoin, we believe that compliance is essential for the healthy and sustainable growth of the crypto industry—this has always been our stance and will continue to guide us as we move forward. We remain committed to supporting the industry’s long-term development through proactive and responsible practices.”Under the country’s laws, operators of crypto sales, storage, brokerage and management are required to report to the FIU. If exchanges don’t comply, their business will be considered illegal and subject to criminal penalties and administrative sanctions. An FIU official said in the report that measures to block access to the exchanges included in the list are being reviewed. The official said the financial regulator is currently consulting with the Korea Communications Standards Commission, the regulator in charge of the internet, on how they can block access to the exchanges. Related: Wemix denies cover-up amid delayed $6.2M bridge hack announcementSouth Korean exchanges face scrutiny Apart from foreign exchanges, South Korean crypto exchanges are also facing scrutiny over suspicions and rumors of financial misconduct. On March 20, prosecutors raided Bithumb following suspicions that its former CEO, Kim Dae-sik, embezzled company funds to purchase an apartment. The authorities suspect that the exchange and its executive may have violated some financial laws during the apartment purchase. However, Bithumb responded that Kim had already taken a loan to repay the funds. In addition, rumors of intermediaries getting paid to list projects on Bithumb and Upbit surfaced. Citing anonymous sources, Wu Blockchain said projects claimed to have paid intermediaries millions to get listed on the exchanges. Upbit responded, demanding the media outlet to disclose the list of digital asset projects that paid brokerage fees. Magazine: Crypto fans are obsessed with longevity and biohacking: Here’s why

South Korea eyes KuCoin, BitMEX in crypto exchange crackdown  
South Korea eyes KuCoin, BitMEX in crypto exchange crackdown  

South Korean authorities are reportedly looking into blocking crypto exchange platforms that may have operated without adhering to the requirements set by the country’s financial regulator. On March 21, local media Hankyung reported that the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) of the Financial Services Commission is considering sanctions against crypto exchanges for allegedly operating in the country without reporting as an operator to the appropriate regulators. South Korean financial authorities require crypto exchanges to report to regulators as virtual asset service providers (VASPs) under the country’s Specified Financial Information Act. The FIU is investigating a list of exchanges and is conducting consultations with related agencies. The regulator is also considering sanctions, such as blocking access to the exchanges, as they begin to prepare countermeasures. Exchanges operated without VASP reportsThe list of exchanges that have allegedly provided services to South Koreans without the appropriate VASP reports includes BitMEX, KuCoin, CoinW, Bitunix and KCEX. The exchanges reportedly provided marketing and customer support to Korean investors without going through the country’s compliance process. Under the country’s laws, operators of crypto sales, storage, brokerage and management are required to report to the FIU. If exchanges don’t comply, their business will be considered illegal and subject to criminal penalties and administrative sanctions. An FIU official said in the report that measures to block access to the exchanges included in the list are being reviewed. The official said the financial regulator is currently consulting with the Korea Communications Standards Commission, the regulator in charge of the internet, on how they can block access to the exchanges. Related: Wemix denies cover-up amid delayed $6.2M bridge hack announcementSouth Korean exchanges face scrutiny Apart from foreign exchanges, South Korean crypto exchanges are also facing scrutiny over suspicions and rumors of financial misconduct. On March 20, prosecutors raided Bithumb following suspicions that its former CEO, Kim Dae-sik, embezzled company funds to purchase an apartment. The authorities suspect that the exchange and its executive may have violated some financial laws during the apartment purchase. However, Bithumb responded that Kim had already taken a loan to repay the funds. In addition, rumors of intermediaries getting paid to list projects on Bithumb and Upbit surfaced. Citing anonymous sources, Wu Blockchain said projects claimed to have paid intermediaries millions to get listed on the exchanges. Upbit responded, demanding the media outlet to disclose the list of digital asset projects that paid brokerage fees. Magazine: Crypto fans are obsessed with longevity and biohacking: Here’s why

Open chat
1
BlockFo Chat
Hello 👋, How can we help you?
📱 When you've pressed the BlockFo button, we automatically transfer to WhatsApp 🔝🔐
🖥️ Or, if you use a PC or Mac, then we'll open a new window to load your desktop app.