The US and the UK have refused to sign a declaration on "inclusive and sustainable" artificial intelligence at a landmark Paris summit, in a blow to hopes for a concerted approach to developing and regulating the technology.

The communique states that priorities include "ensuring AI is open, inclusive, transparent, ethical, safe, secure and trustworthy, taking into account international frameworks for all" and "making AI sustainable for people and the planet".

The document was backed by 60 other signatories on Tuesday, including France, China, India, Japan, Australia and Canada.

A UK government spokesperson said the statement had not gone far enough in addressing global governance of AI and the technology's impact on national security.

"We agreed with much of the leaders' declaration and continue to work closely with our international partners. This is reflected in our signing of agreements on sustainability and cybersecurity today at the Paris AI Action summit," the spokesperson said. "However, we felt the declaration didn't provide enough practical clarity on global governance, nor sufficiently address harder questions around national security and the challenge AI poses to it."

Confirmation of the snub came soon after the US vice-president, JD Vance, took to the stage at the Grand Palais to criticise Europe's "excessive regulation" of technology and warn against cooperating with China.

Asked if Britain had declined to sign because it wanted to follow the US lead, Keir Starmer's spokesperson said they were "not aware of the US reasons or position" on the declaration. A government source rejected the suggestion that Britain was trying to curry favour with the US.

But a Labour MP said: "I think we have little strategic room but to be downstream of the US." They added that US AI firms could stop engaging with the UK government's AI Safety Institute, a world-leading research body, if Britain was perceived to be taking an overly restrictive approach to the development of the technology.

Campaign groups criticised the UK's decision and said it risked damaging its reputation in this area. Andrew Dudfield, the head of AI at Full Fact, said the UK risked "undercutting its hard-won credibility as a world leader for safe, ethical and trustworthy AI innovation" and that there needed to be "bolder government action to protect people from corrosive AI-generated misinformation".

Gaia Marcus, director of the Ada Lovelace Institute, which focuses on AI research, said the UK's actions "go against the vital global governance that AI needs."

The Élysée Palace said more countries might sign the declaration in the hours after the two-day summit.

Vance's hard-hitting speech, in front of leaders including the French president, Emmanuel Macron, and the Indian prime minister, Narendra Modi, indicated dissatisfaction with the global approach to regulating and developing the technology. Starmer did not attend the summit.

Vance, in his first trip abroad as US vice-president, warned against the EU's regulatory approach, stating that "excessive regulation of the AI sector could kill a transformative industry".

He added: "We need international regulatory regimes that foster the creation of AI technology rather than strangle it, and we need our European friends, in particular, to look to this new frontier with optimism rather than trepidation."

Two other EU regulatory measures, the Digital Services Act and GDPR, also received passing criticism from Vance, who did not stay for the leaders' group photo after his speech. Singling out the DSA, which regulates social media, the vice-president said: "It is one thing to prevent a predator from preying on a child on the internet. And it is something quite different to prevent a grown man or woman from accessing an opinion that the government thinks is misinformation."

Vance also referred to the risks of partnering with "authoritarian" regimes, in a pointed allusion to China – without mentioning the country directly. Referring to exports of CCTV and 5G equipment – key Chinese tech products – by authoritarian governments, he said there was a cost: "Partnering with such regimes, it never pays off in the long term."

As the Chinese vice-premier, Zhang Guoqing, sat yards away, Vance added: "Some of us in this room have learned from experience partnering with them means chaining your nation to an authoritarian master that seeks to infiltrate, dig in and seize your information infrastructure. Should a deal seem too good to be true, just remember the old adage that we learned in Silicon Valley, if you aren't paying for the product: you are the product."

Vance started his speech by cautioning against an excessive focus on safety, in an apparent criticism of the first global AI summit in the UK in 2023, which was badged as the AI Safety Summit. He indicated that he thought the Bletchley Park meeting was too cautious, referring to gatherings about cutting-edge technology that can be "too self-conscious, too risk averse".

!aichads

dm me

the hate i feel for you cannot be expressed in words https://t.co/QitlEVvgNk

— . (@heshidicjudaism) February 12, 2025

Whoopsies I did a lil nazifrickywucky uwu :3

EVERYONE who's over the age of ten and watches anime is a libertarian. NO EXCEPTIONS

Remember to upmarsey this important post

I can't even

Using AI directly is useless too it just tells me to reinstall when the installation itself is the problem then rewords itself to tell me to install repeatedly until it starts hallucinating

I hate the modern web I hate the modern web I hate the modern web

"Oligarchy" was an act of High Power.

It's no different than rightoids commenting "Vaxxed????" on any news article regarding the death of someone under the age of 65.

I'd expect them to introduce friction and confusion amongst allies, major trading partners, and at home, degrade and dismantle major institutions like in the FBI, CIA, and NIH so they cannot get a see what is going on, take a foreign policy stance regarding Ukraine that is in Russia's favor, further exacerbate domestic issues to distract and pin the people against each other, and pin more blame to groups other than Russia like Mexico and China.

That way, Russia can move and act more freely without the US knowing or even being able to do anything and the US will have lost their capacity to function for years-decades at best.

We're ripe for a massive increase in corruption because key groups with oversight capabilities are being done away with. FBI are being degraded, so we won't even know let alone measure what is going on. NIH is being degraded, so we are losing our key health surveillance and research infrastructure to address chronic illnesses and new infectious disease we know are coming our way. Musk even took aim at major US defense programs like the F35, which we know is accumulating strong evidence of its effectiveness as Allied countries have shown, so the military may well be degraded too on top of things.

Russian agent or simply corrupt and unhinged (why not both?), the Trump administration is in the process of doing, and has done, more damage to us than our adversaries could do alone.

The question of "Is he a Russian asset or not?" doesn't matter if the outcome is the same. Putin is probably building more troll farms as we speak.

They would probably start dismantling the government agencies that are investigating them.

And maybe slip up and give a Nazi salute during the inauguration

Gestures around generally

Yup. It's happening now, just look around.

Although I'd argue that Trump is too stupid to be a "secret agent." He's just a fricking useful idiot for them.

I assume Musk bought the pee tapes from Putin and that's why Musk is now holding press conferences in the Oval Office.

They still think the pee tapes are a thing.

Why can't libs recognize Russia as the irrelevant backwater that it is?