🤝 Interview with Guillaume Beaumier and Antonio Calcara on #AI: csds.vub.be/publication/... @acalcara.bsky.social @gbeaumier.bsky.social

@jfmorin.bsky.social @swatisrivastava.bsky.social @frabitz.bsky.social @tylergirard.bsky.social @bhaggart.bsky.social @prleblond.bsky.social @vincentab.bsky.social @philippedubois.bsky.social @deborahavant.bsky.social

In the paper, we explain how the US used its control over the design of advanced chips to constraint China's tech development. Give it a look ! It's available in open access 👇👇
academic.oup.com/isq/article/...

For a shorter version of our argument, you can read the following policy brief: marycenter.ku.dk/projekter/om...

Full article available in open access here: www.researchgate.net/profile/Jean...

Promoting and valuing expertise in public organizations appears more important than ever. /end

However, we probably did not emphasize enough the additional risks for states to become dependent on a single company for key space activities. This was made evident by Elon Musk's threats to decommission the dragon spacecraft following its public break-up with Trump.
abcnews.go.com/Technology/e...

At the time, we were primarily emphasizing the risks for states to loose public support associated with private companies. This is akin to celebrating Apple for creating the iPhone without recognizing that much of it was built on inventions funded by and built for the American government.

However, we warned in our conclusion that "increasing reliance of governments on private companies is that their contributions may become less visible over time as private actors gain more prominence. In many ways, SpaceX, not NASA, has become the public face of space exploration."

This exemplified a form of mutualist relationships where each partner could gain from the other. While public organizations benefitted from the flexibility and higher risk tolerance of private organizations, the latter crucially gained revenues, expertise, and technology from working with the former