With AI’s exponential growth and its increasing uses in nearly all sectors, governments across the world are racing to keep this advancing technology under their control. Three key players have emerged in the global battle in keeping tech companies in check — China, the European Union, and the United States — each with their own unique approach and philosophy towards governance.

But alongside their internal power struggles, these three players are also competing against each other in exporting their style of regulation to the rest of the world, and there’s no clear leader in sight.

To break down the dynamics of AI regulation, the FCC hosted a Club Lunch discussion on September 20 with Professor Anu Bradford from Columbia Law School. Bradford is an expert in international trade law and digital regulation, as well as the author of Digital Empires: The Global Battle to Regulate Technology, which was published in September 2023.

“There’s a recognition that AI is one of the most important ‘theaters of war,’” Bradford said. “That’s where the most important battles are being fought, and that’s where you cannot afford to be left behind.”

Alongside FCC Professional Committee member Antony Dapiran who served as the moderator of the talk, Bradford explained the differences between AI regulation’s “horizontal” battles (between different governments) and “vertical” battles (between governments and their respective tech companies). While the vertical battles result in either self-regulation by tech companies or government overreach, horizontal battles highlight the different approaches by the three main regulation players and how they attempt to export their style of regulation.

China takes on a state-driven approach similar to how the rest of the country is governed. The US is market-driven, meaning that free speech and internet, along with innovation, are core values that guide legislation. On the other hand, the EU is rights-driven — the democratic rights of internet users are the top priority for European lawmakers.

Both the US and EU are considered “liberal democracies” in the tech world while China is more authoritative, yet it is China that poses a significant challenge in the US and EU’s efforts to extend their methods of regulation to the rest of the world.

“It’s the Chinese model that holds greater appeal,” said Bradford, citing higher surveillance as one of the reasons why countries with higher crime rates than the US and EU might adopt China’s way of using AI.

Another reason why other countries might idealize China’s model is due to a critical look at how technological innovation still exists despite the heavy regulation that the US and EU constantly warn against.

“There’s been this notion that the American model is partially superior because people are free, and when you are free, freedom is necessary for innovation,” she said. “China has challenged that notion. China has shown that even though it is not free, it has been able to innovate.”

Additionally, Bradford cited the US’ failed attempts at enforcing its own tech companies to self-regulate, resulting in growing concerns over the privacy and data safety of American internet users.

“The American digital empire is declining,” she said. “There’s very little faith anymore in the tech companies’ self-regulation. Even the US is slowly abandoning its hardcore commitment to free markets and sort of recognizing it hasn’t provided a society that is necessarily free or where democracy is more robust.”

However, China does have one limitation: generative AI. This is where Bradford explains that the US has a significant advantage over China given the Chinese government’s level of censorship, which results in the data pool for Language Learning Models to train being drastically reduced.

“That might be the moment for the US to say, ‘look, ultimately there are limits to your [China’s] innovations in certain domains of technology where you are restricting information,’” she said.

A couple of outliers that Bradford mentioned in her talk are India and Japan, who both pick and choose the elements from the three styles of regulation and aren’t necessarily emerging as their own separate digital empires.

Mixed styles of regulation like these also leave room for increased influence from either the authoritative models or tech companies that pose major risks to the US and EU models.

“That leaves the the US and the EU with a very big challenge that if they cannot show to themselves and to the world that there is a liberal democratic way to govern tech companies, the true digital empires are either the authoritarians or the tech companies, and that is a very disconcerting outcome for anybody who believes in liberal democracy as a foundation for human engagement and for our digital society,” Bradford concluded.

Digital Empires: The Global Battle to Regulate Technology is now available on Amazon.

Watch the full talk on our YouTube channel below:

September’s FCC Wall Exhibition features the work of Tsang Tsou Choi, the legendary King of Kowloon who was an iconic figure in Hong Kong’s art world and unexpectedly passed away in 2007. His use of traditional (and not-so-traditional) Chinese characters became a common sight around the city, telling stories across walls, light posts, mailboxes, sidewalks, and other parts of public spaces.

Before his death, Willie Chung took it upon himself to learn more about the King of Kowloon and preserve his works as a part of his life’s mission, becoming the King’s caretaker for many years — right up until the last week before he passed away.

After the King passed away in 2007, Hong Kong’s art world pleaded with the local government to not wash away or paint over his works, insisting that his graffiti was a cultural icon. Over time, Chung accumulated the largest King of Kowloon collection in the world and has become committed to telling the King’s story.

Sitting down with FCC Journalist Board Member Joe Pan at a Club Lunch on September 11th, Chung talked about his journey as an artist trying to make sense of the King’s seemingly odd behaviour and artistic style.

“Many of us, including myself, didn’t fully appreciate or understand his actions and his artworks in the past,” Chung said. “I am quite sure, even up to this moment right now, a lot of people still don’t understand what he was writing.”

Through his relationship with the King of Kowloon, Chung was able to author five books about the legendary artist and has also created workshops and exhibitions dedicated to educating others, especially the younger generation.

“They asked me why I think I need to create a lot of workshops, why it’s so important. Because, I would like to tell the whole story of what I know about Uncle Choi to the new generation,” he said.

In order to broaden the scope of the talk, Chung’s colleague Hilary Wong also joined the panel to share her views on Hong Kong’s art scene and the evolving role of curators. To her, curators have an important role in promoting the work of growing artists and after the year 2000, they have shifted their focus from fine art to contemporary art.

In line with local curators’ modern preference for contemporary art, Wong also explained how the city can increase its prominence as a global art hub. She believes that highlighting local artists is key.

“We have more focus on local artists. Every place in the world, when the art fairs come in, local artists will be recognized,” Wong said.

She also highlighted future projects that include experimental learning, the artistic work of students in STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Art, and Math), digital art, and even the works of Leonardo Da Vinci. She also mentioned new programs for children that break away from the traditional classroom setting for a more involved learning experience.

“This center will be a new approach for learning, entertainment learning,” she said. “So we hope to teach the students through playing, not very traditional learning centers. It’s a museum-like setting.”

Circling back to the King of Kowloon, moderator Joe Pan was curious about where exactly one could find the famed graffiti in Hong Kong. Both Chung and Wong said a list would be coming out soon, but not just yet.

“We can tell you that there are more than thirty works out in the public, but they’re hiding!” Wong said.

Watch the full talk on our YouTube channel below:

“Every job that we have is going to be affected.”

In her FCC Club Lunch titled “The Future of Work in an AI-Powered World”, Diana Wu David gave an overview of how generative AI has inevitably changed the workforce across nearly all sectors and what the future of employment may look like. Moderating the discussion was FCC First Vice President Jennifer Jett.

David, a future-of-work strategist and best-selling author, finds that there are two responses that working adults have taken in response to AI’s boom over the past year — one, to deny its rise and refuse to use it, or two, to “play” with AI and see what’s possible.

David’s suggestion: response number two.

“It [AI] helps a lot! If you can think about it, if you’re not really sure what to say, or you’re not really sure what to write, being able to use ChatGPT or some kind of machine learning to prompt you or write it for you is really amazing. You all-of-a-sudden can learn faster and produce faster,” she said.

While she admitted that AI has certainly changed hiring strategies and job openings (citing her own company’s use of AI for marketing materials and presentations), the bigger impact she mentioned was the transformation in how organizations think of value at work. David then cited an MIT study that showed a 14% improvement in low-level performers, as well as faster onboarding periods and a higher focus on the “fun parts” of work over completing mundane, time-consuming tasks.

“What it [AI] is doing is upgrading the ‘normals,’” she said.

In the case of journalism, David elaborated that AI can allow journalists to spend more time diving deep into their reporting and having AI write for them, which could then lead to a shift in media organizations valuing a journalist’s access and ideas over how well they may be able to write in English (or any other language).

“If that [writing well] doesn’t matter because ChatGPT can write in the style of the Financial Times or the Lex column, then who we’re hiring might change. Maybe it doesn’t matter to find the best writer,” she said.

Truly demonstrating her profession as a futurist expert, David also gave her thoughts on what students who aren’t currently working can do now in order to set themselves up for success in a future career alongside AI. She mentioned two qualities, adaptability and lifelong learning, as more important than the overall focus of a student’s degree program.

“The reality is that whatever major you choose is probably not that important. It’s more about how you can continue to learn over time and be adaptable,” she said.

Watch the full talk on our YouTube channel below:

While AI technology isn’t an entirely new concept, headlines regarding its growth and increasing uses have become more frequent in 2023.

Open AI generating over $1 billion in revenue, military applications, ChatGPT being allowed (or banned) at Hong Kong universities, the Hollywood writers’ strikes, and even philosophical debates are all stories that have gotten more people interested in AI over the past year.

In response to the increased interest, the FCC held a Club Breakfast panel on September 4th with two of Hong Kong’s leading AI experts: Jack Lau and Sophiya Chiang, both who are experts in AI development and AI startup investment respectively.

The breakfast panel was moderated by FCC Journalist Board Member Joe Pan.

Lau, CEO of Swanland.AI, began the talk with an overview of AI’s capabilities, particularly with what are its current limitations.

“We have to really understand that although we are fascinated by AI, even as of today, some of the easiest things are completely messed up by AI,” he said.

Lau then explained a theory by Daniel Kahneman, a Nobel Prize-winning psychologist, that proposed that there are two systems of human thinking: System 1, which is based on our habits and experiences; and System 2, which is based on logic and reasoning. 

“There’s no AI currently that I am aware of that does level two well,” he said, which backed his belief that AI should be used as a “co-pilot” with the human workforce.

After Lau’s overview, Chiang shared her analysis on how Hong Kong can continue to embrace the advancing technology at schools and universities — instead of banning or ignoring it.

“I think it’s more about how you use AI in your daily learning and education that’s more important than actually banning it outright, because it’s inevitable,” she said.

Her point was made in specific reference to HKU’s initial ban of ChatGPT-4, which was dropped just last month. Meanwhile, HKUST and other universities in the city have allowed students to use AI in their coursework.

“This technology is advancing whether we like it or not, and so the best way that we can approach it would be to make sure we have the infrastructure in place to teach with AI,” Chiang said.

The panel also discussed AI’s lack of cultural context, Language Learning Models (LLMs), AI regulation, and how Hong Kong can stand out as an AI testing ground.

Watch the full talk on our YouTube channel below:

With Hong Kong’s housing issues consistently making headlines — cage homes, sky-high rent, and long wait times for public housing — the Foreign Correspondents’ Club (FCC) assembled a Club Lunch panel to attempt to answer a longstanding question: Is Hong Kong’s housing problem solvable?

The panel, held on August 28, consisted of Legislative Council (LegCo) members Doreen Kong, Andrew Lam, and Dominic Lee, as well as Sze Lai Shan, Deputy Director of the Society for Community Organisation (SoCO). Moderating the panel discussion was FCC First Vice President Jennifer Jett.

When asked about the biggest housing issue that Hong Kong faces, the panel didn’t give a single answer. Instead, they agreed that the variety of problems in the city are all intertwined with one another and must be addressed in a multi-faceted way.  

“I’ve got the feeling that the Hong Kong government does not know how to deal with this complex issue,” said Kong, who has focused a core part of her LegCo career on making more housing affordable for residents.

A part of the complex issue that Kong refers to is the city’s public housing system. Scoring factors such as age, income, family size, and residence/citizenship are what the Hong Kong Housing Authority (HKHA) uses to determine who is eligible for public housing.

While the panel agreed that this system isn’t perfect and that there are cases of people abusing public resources, an overhaul of the HKHA’s scoring system still might not be helpful.

“Even if you adjust the [public housing] scoring system, it’s not actually going to help because you’re only moving the distribution from one demographic to another demographic,” said Lee.

Lee also said that while addressing multiple housing issues at once is a good strategy, there still must be some kind of prioritisation of these issues when considering economic feasibility, especially those that involve land reclamation.

Lam, former Executive Director of the Urban Renewal Authority, noted that acquiring land may take longer than planned, but that it is worth the wait.

“I’m all for [land] reclamation. That’s the only place where the government can take full charge,” he said.

Lee disagreed, saying, “Lantau Tomorrow is a ‘vision’… a 20-year project. Most of us are not going to be around in 20 years … they consider that area the third [Central Business District] of Hong Kong. But to be honest, are you going to put your HSBC headquarters in that area? Probably not.”

Lantau Tomorrow Vision is a government project that aims to create artificial islands in the waters near eastern Lantau Island, reclaiming about 1,700 hectares of land, and is expected to cost an estimated HK$624 billion (US$80 billion).

Also concerned with land supply, Sze explained how less land leads to less public housing and the over 220,000 people now living in cage homes – the primary focus of her SoCO work.

She noted that over her career, the number of illegal cage homes has increased and that the overall quality of cage homes hasn’t improved, but that the media’s focus on them overshadows a newer — and perhaps more problematic — type of housing issue: subdivided flats.

“Visually, the cage homes are more sensational … journalists always take photos,” Sze said. “Subdivided [flats] are not so sensational, but they’re still a serious housing problem.”

She listed some of the issues with subdivided flats (despite having better living conditions than cage homes), including increased plumbing and structural issues that can harm entire buildings.

Sze views both the cage homes and subdivided flats as issues that can be solved as long as the government takes an active role in addressing these residents’ needs.

“It depends on ourselves whether we want to help those people that are so poor. They are underprivileged,” she said.

Lee also agreed with Sze’s analysis of the cage homes and subdivided flats, and added that cage homes are a result of poverty, income inequality, and the overall housing shortage, all of which should be included in the city’s efforts to reduce the number of cage homes.

“If we’re facing as a city a huge housing shortage, then no matter how much public housing we have, we’re still going to have these cage homes,” Lee said.

Despite the various issues discussed throughout the panel, as well as the obstacles faced when trying to solve Hong Kong’s housing issues, the panellists agreed that their plans are within their reach.

“I’m optimistic about how it’s heading towards. We have a lot of work to do, but as long as we keep our hopes up, I think we will do just fine,” said Lee.

For Kong, her belief in change lies in the government’s commitment to listening to all members of society and developing clear plans to solve their problems.

“If we really want to solve the housing problems — all sorts of housing problems in Hong Kong — we need to have a very clear, very defined and integrated strategy to deal with all kinds of housing issues and also different needs of different segments of Hong Kong people,” she said.

Watch the full talk on our YouTube channel below:

As Hong Kong enters its third year under the Beijing-imposed National Security Law (NSL), a panel of legal experts and politicians gathered at The Foreign Correspondents’ Club (FCC) to discuss its effect on the city. 

Sitting on the panel were John Burns, Honorary Professor of Politics and Public Administration at The University of Hong Kong (HKU); Albert Chen, Chair of Constitutional Law at HKU; former Legislative Council member Emily Lau; and Senior Counsel/Executive Council member Ronny Tong. The talk was moderated by FCC President Lee Williamson. 

“When it comes to Hong Kong, the sky falls down,” said Tong when pointing out the support behind other countries’ national security efforts and the criticism Hong Kong’s NSL receives from the international community. 

Burns agreed that all states must ensure national security, however he emphasised that interpretation was key in how national security laws are enforced. He believes that the local government has been using the NSL to intimidate the public and encourage self-censorship, ultimately changing political behavior in the city despite how vague he finds the NSL to be. 

Chen, on the other hand, described NSL offenses as “narrowly-defined” and added that most of the ongoing cases dealt with sedition, not the NSL. He explained that sedition falls under the Crimes Ordinance, which has been a part of Hong Kong’s legal system since the city’s days as a British colony. 

“Political offenses are not subject to extradition,” Chen said when asked about the eight self-exiled activists who are wanted by Hong Kong’s national security police. 

He added that returning the wanted activists to Hong Kong would only work if the countries they fled to had extradition agreements with the city, but that many countries had abolished their agreements due to the NSL. 

For Lau, the strongest critic on the panel, her biggest concern with the NSL is Article 29, which prohibits “provoking hatred” among Hong Kong residents towards the local and central governments. She argued that criticising the government does not equate to provoking hatred but that Article 29 implies as such. To her, this results in the criminalisation of free speech in Hong Kong. 

Lau also criticised the continued detention of the 47 Democrats who have now spent over 90 days in court. 

“This is a question of humane treatment,” Lau said, citing this case as one of the “shockwaves” felt across Hong Kong since the NSL’s enactment along with the various news organisations and NGOs that have either disbanded or left the city. 

“I have strong faith in One Country, Two Systems, and the judiciary,” Tong repeated several times during the discussion. “As a lawyer myself, I know many of the judges and I don’t believe any of them are corrupt. If you think they are corrupt, please tell me.” 

The four panelists were also asked about their thoughts on Article 23, the potential ban of the 2019 protest anthem “Glory to Hong Kong,” and “soft resistance.” 

Watch the full discussion on our YouTube channel:

“Some questions never change.” 

Dr. Tao Wang came to this conclusion after decades of covering China’s economy and her past 15 years of working at UBS Investment Research. Questions about China’s sustainability for economic growth, state and market relationships, and structural issues are what inspired her to write her new book Making Sense of China’s Economy, which was published earlier this year. 

Dr. Wang spoke about her book at The Foreign Correspondents’ Club (FCC) alongside Andrew Chan, a member of the FCC’s Professional Committee who has worked in risk management. 

Her first point: there is no simple narrative regarding China’s economy. The “doom predictions” that Dr. Wang would often hear hadn’t materialized yet, reinforcing her advice to not extrapolate when monitoring the mainland’s economic development. 

Dr. Wang also used her talk to address some of the common misconceptions, one of which is that the Chinese government is a monolithic entity, as well as the concerns about the rising role of the state versus the market. Through graphs and charts, she showed the drop in state ownership in the economy across various sectors between the 1980s until mid 2000s, which has stopped over the past one and half decade. While the state increased its role in social areas (though China still lags OECD countries in social spending) and regulations in recent years, she believes that the lack of progress in SOE reforms contributed to the perception of an ever-larger role of the state. 

“I’m not as pessimistic,” she said when addressing the decline of China’s working population and long-term potential growth. 

Acknowledging the challenges of decline in the working-age population, she pointed out that there is still surplus labor to be transferred out of farming, and that China’s actual retirement age of 54 is very young when compared to China’s average life expectancy (78 years). A gradual and modest extension of retirement age can help increase labor supply this decade.  

Along with the declining work population, Dr. Wang mentioned other challenges to China’s economy: social inequality between urban and rural citizens, rising debt, access to technology, and geoeconomic issues. She believes that while problems in accessing advanced technology will be negative for China, the country still has plenty of room to catch up and move up the technology ladder by applying existing mature technologies. 

Dr. Wang noted that economic reforms and “opening up” to the rest of the world were key behind China’s economic success. One thing the government did right was being pragmatic and adaptive to different challenges, she highlighted.  

But will China continue to be pragmatic and adaptive? Dr. Wang said that is perhaps the biggest question. The answer is not clear, however she is “cautiously optimistic.” 

Making Sense of China’s Economy is now available on Amazon.

Watch the full discussion on our YouTube channel: