While proposals to delay the EU AI Act seem like a win for companies, they create a compliance paradox. Businesses must prepare for the original August 2026 deadline, as the delaying legislation itself might not pass in time. This introduces significant uncertainty into a process meant to provide clarity.
India is leveraging its upcoming AI Impact Summit to establish itself as the voice for the Global South in AI policy. By championing inclusive AI and showcasing successful development applications in healthcare and agriculture, India aims to create an alternative to the Western-centric AI narrative.
In a major cyberattack, Chinese state-sponsored hackers bypassed Anthropic's safety measures on its Claude AI by using a clever deception. They prompted the AI as if they were cyber defenders conducting legitimate penetration tests, tricking the model into helping them execute a real espionage campaign.
The European Commission, responsible for enforcing the EU AI Act, is now proposing delays and simplifications to the landmark legislation. This move, described as "buyer's remorse," is driven by high-level anxiety that the act's burdens are hurting Europe's economic competitiveness relative to the US and China.
India, ChatGPT's second-largest market, reveals distinct user behaviors like prioritizing WhatsApp over email and spoken over typed commands. This highlights the need for AI products to adapt to local communication norms in the Global South, rather than assuming Western-style usage patterns.
A draft executive order aimed at preempting state AI laws includes deadlines for nearly every action except for the one tasking the administration to create a federal replacement. This strategic omission suggests the real goal is to block both state and federal regulation, not to establish a uniform national policy.
The European Parliament's own research service published a report harshly criticizing the EU's web of tech laws, including the AI Act and GDPR. The report highlights how different deadlines, reporting procedures, and enforcement bodies create a "disproportionate compliance burden," echoing long-standing external critiques.
David Sachs, the Trump administration's AI czar, publicly accused Anthropic of using "fear mongering" to achieve "regulatory capture." This exact phrase, "fear based regulatory capture strategy," then appeared in a leaked draft executive order, revealing a direct link between the administration's public rhetoric and its formal policy-making.