“The AI ​​is at a turning point. Anxiety is palpable in conferences on the subject “

“There is so much anxiety. It is very evident in events where artificial intelligence is discussed. Investors are terrified of what could happen. Terrified and euphoric at the same time. The amount of money at stake is huge. And with this technology, the winner takes everything. ” Marco Trombetti was one of the few Italians present at the Artificial Intelligence Action Summit in Paris. Upon returning, he took a few days before talking about it. He must have been busy, that’s safe. It is one of the Italian entrepreneurs who know the most. His 25 -year -old company has been working in the field of translations and AI since its foundation. Sell ​​your services to Spacex, Uber and Airbnb. He has had time to process impressions, messages and guidelines. “It’s hard to say how desperate it is the return of investment today. I don’t see perspectives. Only chips and infrastructure producers earn money today. The others are doing proof and error, many are losing, and many more will lose in the future. His fear is justified. “

Even you, Mr. Trombetti, doubtful of AI’s perspectives?

“None of that. I think it is the greatest economic and social revolution in the history of humanity. However, investors in the sector have a big problem today: no one can afford to make mistakes.”

What do you mean?

“Seen from the outside, there seems to be many people ready to put their money. I mean, investors ready to play.” But every euro invested is backed by anxiety. Everyone is afraid to make mistakes. This is true today more than ever in the history of the digital economy. Because today making the moment, investing badly, focusing on the wrong company means being seriously injured. The amount of money that revolves around this technology is amazing. “

Anxiety and enthusiasm seem difficult feelings to combine.

“In Arabic there is a phrase that I find particularly adequate: Fil Mishmish. It means more or less ‘Albaricoques will arrive tomorrow’. It is an expression used to close a negotiation that is not leading to anything because it promises a future that will never come. It is a way of postponing hope, of giving the illusion that something positive is about to happen, when in reality it only discourages. “

The first technological wave certainly brought apricots: digital giants and dozens, hundreds of prosperous companies. What is different now?

“Today everyone fear that there is only one winner. The first wave of the Internet was a gold fever. The web offered an infinite number of possible applications, reducing costs. Many different companies could be founded for each sector of the market. Internet was a facilitator of things, and everyone could do it by launching projects with loose change. Today you need billions to enter this race. In addition, there is no second or third place when AI advances to a new level. Everything else quickly becomes obsolete. “

Are you saying that companies of billions of dollars could crumble?

“I am saying that everyone today rushes to reach the most powerful level of artificial intelligence. AGI, to be clear. However, there is very little difference between the companies that do. Everyone is training more or less with the same data. Meanwhile, neural network training is no longer a capex (that is, capital spending, which is fixed and unique, like a computer, ed.) But it has become an OPEX (an operational expense, such as the Electricity-E.). In such a scenario, the new immediately makes the rest obsolete. Who falls will be hurt. “

What will these companies stay then?

“Technology is replicable. Only human capital will remain, little more. “

So who wins the game of the win?

“That is the most widespread fear at this time: that only one company will win the global artificial intelligence career. To be clear, fear is that, instead of 5 large technological companies, there will only be one. “

Is this scenario likely?

“It’s hard to say it. Deepseek has shown that even if you can’t overcome them, it can cause problems for the largest with few resources. Therefore, the little ones can have their market share, deriving from the possibility of monopolistic concentration. But these dynamics are difficult to predict. That is why there is anxiety. However, for the same reason there is hope, and you can see positive signs of current and future competition. “

How was it in Paris?

“For me, it was a great French success and a great European failure. Macron was clear and strategic. The other European countries did not even appear. Macron has understood the impact of AI and is building a block by block to make the most of, focusing on its strengths: nuclear energy, data centers and language models as a misstal. It is investing in human capital, turning the Polytechnic into artificial intelligence schools and with the aim of creating 100,000 talents from AI per year. It is a missing strategy in another place. “

Missing in Europe.

“The United States and China are doing everything possible to claim technological supremacy in this area. Macron has moved a pawn, so he is playing his game, no matter how small it is. Europe has not understood how or what game you are playing, so you don’t know how to play. In the medium term, it runs the risk of losing wealth, quality of life and, above all, the market. While the world faces a revolution of the time, Europe is regulating. “This is a negative message of all points of view and for all partners, competitors and new generations, who feel they live in an old country. For the latter, the indication is clear: if you want to innovate, then go. “

Don’t you like the act of AI either?

“It’s not that I don’t like it. It’s just that it is already obsolete. Regulates mechanisms that have ceased to exist. In addition, avoid innovations in the sector. Just consider the problem of emotion recognition. I deal with translation. How can I improve my service if I can’t understand the emotions that accompany an expression? It is just an example, but what has been regulated goes beyond what legislators could have imagined. “

Are you saying that legislators had no clear idea of ​​what they were legislating?

“Indeed.”

What should politics do?

“My point on politics in my talk in Paris was: it is not influencing innovation, but we need to guarantee long -term assets. And at this time one of the best assets we have as Europeans is Greenland. “

Green earth?

“Indeed. There, Europe can create data centers with lower cooling costs. It is also a strategic point of data contact between Europe and the United States, since it is possible to transmit low latency. It can even be difficult to think about This today, but tomorrow will be fundamental.

You are talking tomorrow, the long term. Is it still possible to think of long -term strategies after the time that has been lost?

“Lost time is an illusion. Time does not work against us. The gap that the US opened over the rest of the world with Openai has already been reduced. Time can be our ally. But the game must be played from a European point of view. “

So what worries you about Europe?

“There are many things that worry me. The issue of the rules worries me, because they seem to be made with a lack of experience. I think the legislators could not understand the phenomenon. They confused risks with opportunities. The legislation is myopic compared to reality. But there is a major problem. “

What’s that?

“That this approach will scare young talents. Innovators do not feel welcome in Europe. If you wonder what you have to do to welcome talent, you understand that the law of the IA does the opposite. They do not understand the phenomenon. They impose huge sanctions for each error, and those who innovate know how important are the errors. ”

@arcamasilum

English version of an interview published in Italian, here.