America has been a particularly annoying notional ally and former friend over recent months. But what would be the point of complaining? President Trump has been doing exactly as he promised last year. He is acting only out of America's interests, narrowly defined, and does not give a toss about what allies, notional members of the western alliance or even foreign heads of state with whom he has any sort of personal relationship think. He is not carefully nurturing alliance relationships or promoting any sense of security that the US is the ultimate reliable friend and guarantor of western commerce, stable relationships under the rule of law, or promoter of peace. Indeed, it appears that he is at that stage of his presidency where he is more concerned with physical monuments to his greatness, such as triumphal arches, presidential ballrooms and, perhaps a place on Mount Rushmore than any international legacy of peace, growth and prosperity, and confidence in the future.

Subscribe now for unlimited access.

Login or signup to continue reading

Over recent weeks, Australians have become used to a running negative commentary from Trump about a few items that Anthony Albanese seems to want to make his legacy. Australia, it will be remembered, took an international lead in attempting to restrict access to social media for children. Skilful public relations efforts have inspired imitation from other countries, and some praise for Australia, or for at least the idea it contains. As it happens, the scheme doesn't work, because the ones it was supposed to restrain have found a million ways to bypass the controls, while a tiny minority of dutiful kids find themselves constrained. But many parents are quite reasonably concerned at the material available to children on social media and would like to have it thought that there were something in the way of controls, so there has been some praise coming in Albanese's direction. As things stand, it may prove to be the only "achievement" so far for which Albanese might be remembered in Australian history books.

Albanese has extended his efforts to control the flow and type of material available online. His legislation imposes a duty of care on social media providers and gives users more control over the algorithms that shape their feeds. He argues that the reforms return control over content to individuals, while big tech companies see them as enabling government censorship and restrictions on free speech. Trump and his administration have echoed those concerns, although Albanese has aimed his proposals less at the United States, Trump or big tech than at other countries and the United Nations. In the long term, strident opposition from vested interests, including Trump, may even help him, as public opinion appears to be turning against a wholly libertarian approach to internet content.

Albanese is also assisted by an international debate now in motion about the future of AI, and the economic opportunities available with data centres. Australia has a limited opportunity for getting a privileged place on the data centre boat, but it is happening just as consumers, particularly in the US, have realised that data centres could prove a two-edged sword, and are arguing for community input and controls over where they are located, under what regulation, and how their virtually unlimited demand for water and energy is going to be satisfied.

Trump's unconvincing 'trust me' on AI development

At the same time there are fears that uncontrolled AI investment may lead to systems able to autonomously break into other systems, destroy privacy, override human instructions and perhaps cause some sort of AI apocalypse. Even high-tech moguls have warned of the need for care, perhaps for a........

© Canberra Times