The Ministry of Commerce responded to the U.S. accusation that Chinese AI companies are distilling industrial scale: it is an act of technological hegemony.

The spokesperson for the Ministry of Commerce answered questions from reporters regarding the announcement made by the U.S. about cybersecurity related to Chinese artificial intelligence companies' distillation activities targeting the U.S. The spokesperson stated that China believes the U.S. accusations about Chinese AI companies engaging in "industrial-scale" distillation of U.S. models are unfounded and have no legal basis. This move by the U.S. politicizes and weaponizes a normal technical and business issue within the industry, while practicing double standards. The U.S. announcement is further evidence of its pursuit of technological hegemony and calculation power monopoly in the field of artificial intelligence, and an attempt to suppress competition. China firmly opposes this. Distillation is a common practice in the field of artificial intelligence where various models learn from each other, and it is inherently a neutral technical means used by global model companies, including those from the U.S. This technical approach can help models enhance their learning efficiency and enable more effective use of human knowledge, which has positive implications for countries to develop their AI industries, unleash the potential of AI technology, bridge development gaps, and more broadly benefit developing countries and the public. The U.S. approach is a typical double standard. For artificial intelligence, China encourages open source and collaborative sharing. Chinese open-source models are made available to global companies, including those from the U.S., facilitating relevant model research and development. Reports from U.S. companies have also revealed that they extensively distill Chinese models. In contrast, the U.S. has repeatedly made unilateral accusations against Chinese companies engaged in "industrial-scale" distillation, tarnishing a common industry practice as an aggressive act, which reflects U.S. anxiety and illustrates its double standard. The U.S. practice is a typical example of using the pretext of combating distillation to achieve industrial monopoly. The U.S. announcement made by security agencies ties individual companies' and capital interests to national security, using state power to interfere with normal business activities. We have noticed that certain American AI companies have abused their competitive advantage by imposing broad territorial restrictions and other unfair terms in their user agreements. The relevant distillation allegations from the U.S. may be seen as endorsing these unfair terms. The U.S. method is a classic case of using state power to maintain technological hegemony and monopolize computational power while suppressing competition. Since the beginning of this year, U.S. executive and legislative bodies have repeatedly issued threats of sanctions and suppression against Chinese companies engaged in distillation, aiming to inhibit competition and maintain U.S. monopoly in computational power and data. This approach benefits only the U.S. and not humanity as a whole, turning what should be globally accessible and equitable AI resources into monopolized resources of a few companies, thus preventing other countries from participating in the equitable sharing of AI innovations. Currently, the large model industry is at a critical stage of technological iteration, risk emergence, and growth development. As major powers, China and the U.S. should address the challenges and risks facing the field of artificial intelligence with a proactive and responsible attitude. The two heads of state have agreed to initiate intergovernmental dialogue on artificial intelligence, and China is willing to conduct constructive and professional discussions with the U.S. based on the principles of equality, mutual benefit, and win-win cooperation. However, if the U.S. takes actions to suppress Chinese AI companies under the guise of combating distillation, China will take resolute measures in response. It is hoped that the U.S. will work with China to manage risks through dialogue and communication, promoting the benefits of the AI industry for the globe. This article is compiled from the official website of the "Ministry of Commerce," edited by Jiang Yuanhua.