China’s AI Trust Score Crushes US and EU as 72% Innovation Surge Defies Sanctions
A new global survey shows China is trusted more than the US and EU to regulate AI, while US sanctions have failed to stop Chinese innovation—patent citations jumped 72%.
A new Pew Research Centre survey has found that China is trusted more than the United States and the European Union to regulate artificial intelligence effectively [243819]. The poll, which covered 11 countries and two territories, mostly middle-income nations, showed that on a median basis, more people in these places said they trust China to regulate AI, with the US and EU ranking lower [243819]. China itself was not included in the survey [243819].
The findings land as global tensions over AI competition intensify and public concern about the technology grows [243819]. Meanwhile, China is not panicking about artificial intelligence—while many in the United States worry that AI could destroy humanity, people in China are already using it in daily life [243388]. Citizens access local government services through AI-powered digital employees, students get instant feedback on written assignments by uploading a photo, and hotel guests collect parcels delivered by robots [243388].
A former Pentagon AI official, Will Thibeau, has warned that strict AI regulation driven by "doomers" could give China an advantage and lock the market into two big players [242593]. He says fears of an AI apocalypse are shaping US policy in ways that hurt American competitiveness, entrenching a duopoly between OpenAI and Anthropic while leaving little room for others [242593]. Thibeau argues both extremes in the debate—those who fear AI will destroy humanity and those who dismiss all risk—miss the real picture [242593].
On the innovation front, US-sanctioned Chinese companies are increasing their use of open-source research to innovate and reverse-engineer restricted foreign technology, according to a new study [243808]. The study found a 72 percent surge in scientific literature citations in their patent applications [243808]. The United States says it expanded its Entity List to protect national security and maintain its technological advantage [243808]. However, an analysis of Chinese patent filings over the 12 years until 2022 shows that US restrictions on access to technology may have accelerated this trend [243808].
The AI boom in China is also creating a stark divide. One in four companies listed on China's stock exchanges reported a loss, even as AI firms surged ahead of the rest of the economy [243770]. The data shows a two-speed China: AI and tech companies are growing fast, while many traditional businesses struggle [243770]. The gap raises questions about whether AI growth alone can support the wider economy [243770].
China is also tightening controls on who can leave the country. People suspected of holding information that could harm national security will be stopped at the border, with Chinese AI developers among those who may be affected [243692].
Meanwhile, analysts say the United States needs a clear national data strategy for the AI era but should not copy China's approach [243772]. Washington is under pressure to keep its edge in artificial intelligence, and data—the fuel for AI systems—is at the center of that competition [243772]. China's model gives the state broad control over data, with companies required to follow strict rules on how data is collected, stored, and shared, and the government able to direct data to serve national goals [243772]. That system has helped China scale AI quickly, but it comes with heavy state oversight and limited private-sector freedom [243772].
The US has a different starting point, with data largely held by private companies and no single national framework for how data is governed [243772]. Critics say this leaves the US without a coordinated plan, and they argue the country needs a strategy that speeds up AI development while protecting privacy and security [243772]. But copying China is not the answer, experts warn, as a state-first model could hurt innovation and raise civil-liberties concerns [243772]. Instead, they say the US should focus on rules that encourage data sharing, protect users, and keep the market open [243772].