Debates over AI Sovereignty could result in a painful lesson for students
The debate surrounding AI sovereignty may be unfolding at the governmental, boardroom and national media level, but these discussions are taking place at a distance from the people who use and rely on AI in the day-to-day.
Governments debate regulation, while technology companies consider where to build and host their models. Founders and investors assess geopolitical risk, infrastructure and access to computing power, while regulators consider how AI systems should be developed and deployed. For people who use AI every day, like students, changes in AI sovereignty and regulation can affect whether the tools they rely on remain available.
Today’s students can be dependent on AI while having little visibility into the infrastructure and policy decisions that determine whether they can continue using it. The digital sovereignty debate has the potential to become an undeniable accessibility barrier for students.
Latest Videos FromTechRadar
The European Union has a history of depending on technology and infrastructure from outside the economic and political bloc. More than 80% of the technology used in Europe and around 70% of its cloud computing comes from non-EU countries. AI adoption has increased Europe’s dependence on other countries, with the United States and China accounting for the overwhelming majority of global AI computing infrastructure.
This year, Europe has made strides to regulate AI usage, which by necessity means regulating foreign corporations. This kind of regulation can easily end up affecting which services students can access. The regulatory objective is understandable. Powerful AI systems create genuine questions around safety, accountability, privacy and intellectual property, but the consequences for daily users can nevertheless extend beyond compliance.
Not so long ago, the US government restricted access to Anthropic’s most powerful models, citing concerns over its cybersecurity applications. It was the first time that businesses and politicians in Europe had to face the reality that the US government can effectively cut off foreign access to American AI systems. The implications extend beyond any one LLM.
For students, that can mean a study tool works perfectly for a classmate in one country while being unavailable to another student sitting a hundred miles away.
If education systems become dependent on AI services developed and controlled elsewhere, a change in regulation, commercial strategy or international relations could affect the availability of tools students have come to regard as part of their everyday learning environment.
AI in education is expanding rapidly. AI tools are being embedded into tutoring, content creation, assessment, study assistance and interactive learning. Just like with any widely-adopted digital tool, however, dependency on a single product from a single company poses huge potential issues.
Going back to 2021, an albeit brief global outage that affected WhatsApp had devastating, widespread consequences, from cutting off vital telemedicine from migrant refugees in Mexico to disrupting livestock farming in Pakistan. It was clear at the time that overreliance on a single technology platform can massively impact life for people around the world.
The same is true for students using AI tools that rely on a single model or are otherwise vulnerable to a regulatory change. A student who uses an AI-powered study platform every day may have no idea whether the service depends on one model or several. They may not know whether their data is stored locally or internationally. They may not know whether the provider has a contingency plan if a model becomes unavailable.
The issue becomes particularly important as AI tools move from being occasional conveniences to becoming embedded in study routines. Imagine a student preparing for an exam who has spent months using an AI tutor to explain concepts and generate practice questions. If the underlying model suddenly becomes inaccessible in that student’s country, it can affect the student’s established way of learning at a critical moment in their educational journey.
A resilient AI education platform needs to consider what happens when a particular model becomes unavailable due to regulatory changes or widespread outage.
One approach is model diversity. Because different AI models have different strengths, a platform can end up using one model for a particular type of reasoning, another for optical character recognition, and another for audio processing. Model diversity is therefore usually driven by a need for better performance when tackling different educational tasks.
Diversifying models can also provide resilience. If one model becomes unavailable, a platform using several models may be able to redirect certain workloads. Backup workflows can provide an additional layer of continuity, although switching between systems can take time and the alternatives may not always provide identical capabilities.
Going EU-first (and what’s next for students and AI literacy)
It’s called the Brussels effect. From sustainability regulations to consumer right to repair, the European Union’s size and economic weight often means that regulations within its borders often shape corporate behavior without them as well.
Taking an EU-first approach to an AI education platform means locating the majority of the platform’s data within the European Union, supporting considerations around data sovereignty, privacy, and regulatory compliance. Some reliance on services and infrastructure originating outside Europe may remain unavoidable, particularly in a technology ecosystem where many of the leading AI providers are headquartered in the United States.
An education platform that depends entirely on one external model provider effectively inherits that provider’s availability and exposure to regulatory changes. A platform with several model options and fallback processes has greater room to adapt.
By aligning that platform’s data management practices with the most stringent global regulations (which currently happen to be the EU’s framework), educational AI companies can do a lot of the necessary work to maintain access to critical AI tools for their students.
From the students’ side, there needs to be a new chapter when it comes to AI literacy in education, which should include a basic understanding of AI dependency.
Students should be encouraged to ask which AI systems power the tools they use; what happens if one of those systems becomes unavailable; where their data is stored and processed; and could regulation in another country affect their access. They don’t need to become experts in cloud infrastructure or AI policy, but do need to understand that an AI application is part of a wider technological ecosystem.
Students in the AI era will depend on systems whose underlying architecture they cannot see. The education sector therefore has a responsibility to make those dependencies more visible and mitigate them where possible. AI literacy should extend beyond knowing how to prompt a model or assess its answer. It should include an understanding of where AI comes from, what it depends on and what happens when access is disrupted.
We’ve featured the best online learning platform..
This article was produced as part of TechRadar Pro Perspectives, our channel to feature the best and brightest minds in the technology industry today.
The views expressed here are those of the author and are not necessarily those of TechRadarPro or Future plc. If you are interested in contributing find out more here: https://www.techradar.com/pro/perspectives-how-to-submit