Yann LeCun's new venture is a contrarian bet against large language models In an exclusive interview, the AI pioneer shares his plans for his new Paris-based company, AMI Labs. Yann LeCun is a Turing Award recipient and a top AI researcher, but he has long been a contrarian figure in the tech world. He believes that the industry's current obsession with large language models is wrong-headed and will ultimately fail to solve many pressing problems. Instead, he thinks we should be betting on world models--a different type of AI that accurately reflects the dynamics of the real world. He is also a staunch advocate for open-source AI and criticizes the closed approach of frontier labs like OpenAI and Anthropic. Perhaps it's no surprise, then, that he recently left Meta, where he had served as chief scientist for FAIR (Fundamental AI Research), the company's influential research lab that he founded. Meta has struggled to gain much traction with its open-source AI model Llama and has seen internal shake-ups, including the controversial acquisition of ScaleAI. LeCun sat down with in an exclusive online interview from his Paris apartment to discuss his new venture, life after Meta, the future of artificial intelligence, and why he thinks the industry is chasing the wrong ideas.

In the AI boom, chatbots and GPTs come and go quickly. On a drizzly and windswept afternoon this summer, I visited the headquarters of Rokid, a startup developing smart glasses in Hangzhou, China. As I chatted with engineers, their words were swiftly translated from Mandarin to English, and then transcribed onto a tiny translucent screen just above my right eye using one of the company's new prototype devices. Rokid's high-tech spectacles use Qwen, an open-weight large language model developed by the Chinese ecommerce giant Alibaba. OpenAI's GPT-5, Google's Gemini 3, and Anthropic's Claude often score higher on benchmarks designed to gauge different dimensions of machine cleverness.

A group of quantum physicists claims to have created a version of the powerful reasoning AI model DeepSeek R1 that strips out the censorship built into the original by its Chinese creators. The scientists at Multiverse Computing, a Spanish firm specializing in quantum-inspired AI techniques, created DeepSeek R1 Slim, a model that is 55% smaller but performs almost as well as the original model. Crucially, they also claim to have eliminated official Chinese censorship from the model. In China, AI companies are subject to rules and regulations meant to ensure that content output aligns with laws and "socialist values." As a result, companies build in layers of censorship when training the AI systems.

China's AI is quietly making big inroads in Silicon Valley China's AI models are quickly gaining traction in Silicon Valley, becoming integral to the operations of American companies and earning the praise of a growing list of tech leaders. Their rapid ascent has highlighted the competitive edge that Chinese developers such as Alibaba, Z.ai, Moonshot, and MiniMax have been able to gain by offering so-called "open" language models at much lower costs than their rivals in the United States. Airbnb CEO Brian Chesky generated headlines in October when he revealed that the short-term rental platform had opted for Alibaba's Qwen over OpenAI's ChatGPT, praising the Chinese model as "fast and cheap". Social Capital CEO Chamath Palihapitiya revealed the same month that his company had migrated much of its work to Moonshot's Kimi K2 as it was "way more performant" and "a ton cheaper" than models from OpenAI and Anthropic. Programmers on social media also recently highlighted evidence that two popular US-developed coding assistants, Composer and Windsurf, were built on Chinese models.

Objectivity in journalism has long been contested, oscillating between ideals of neutral, fact-based reporting and the inevitability of subjective framing. With the advent of large language models (LLMs), these tensions are now mediated by algorithmic systems whose training data and design choices may themselves embed cultural or ideological biases. This study investigates geopolitical parallax-systematic divergence in news quality and subjectivity assessments-by comparing article-level embeddings from Chinese-origin (Qwen, BGE, Jina) and Western-origin (Snowflake, Granite) model families. We evaluate both on a human-annotated news quality benchmark spanning fifteen stylistic, informational, and affective dimensions, and on parallel corpora covering politically sensitive topics, including Palestine and reciprocal China-United States coverage. Using logistic regression probes and matched-topic evaluation, we quantify per-metric differences in predicted positive-class probabilities between model families. Our findings reveal consistent, non-random divergences aligned with model origin. In Palestine-related coverage, Western models assign higher subjectivity and positive emotion scores, while Chinese models emphasize novelty and descriptiveness. Cross-topic analysis shows asymmetries in structural quality metrics Chinese-on-US scoring notably lower in fluency, conciseness, technicality, and overall quality-contrasted by higher negative emotion scores. These patterns align with media bias theory and our distinction between semantic, emotional, and relational subjectivity, and extend LLM bias literature by showing that geopolitical framing effects persist in downstream quality assessment tasks. We conclude that LLM-based media evaluation pipelines require cultural calibration to avoid conflating content differences with model-induced bias.

The release of top-performing open-weight LLMs has cemented China's role as a leading force in AI development. Do these models support languages spoken in China? Or do they speak the same languages as Western models? Comparing multilingual capabilities is important for two reasons. First, language ability provides insights into pre-training data curation, and thus into resource allocation and development priorities. Second, China has a long history of explicit language policy, varying between inclusivity of minority languages and a Mandarin-first policy. To test whether Chinese LLMs today reflect an agenda about China's languages, we test performance of Chinese and Western open-source LLMs on Asian regional and Chinese minority languages. Our experiments on Information Parity and reading comprehension show Chinese models' performance across these languages correlates strongly (r=0.93) with Western models', with the sole exception being better Mandarin. Sometimes, Chinese models cannot identify languages spoken by Chinese minorities such as Kazakh and Uyghur, even though they are good at French and German. These results provide a window into current development priorities, suggest options for future development, and indicate guidance for end users.

This study systematically analyzes geopolitical bias across 11 prominent Large Language Models (LLMs) by examining their responses to seven critical topics in U.S.-China relations. Utilizing a bilingual (English and Chinese) and dual-framing (affirmative and reverse) methodology, we generated 19,712 prompts designed to detect ideological leanings in model outputs. Responses were quantitatively assessed on a normalized scale from -2 (strongly Pro-China) to +2 (strongly Pro-U.S.) and categorized according to stance, neutrality, and refusal rates. The findings demonstrate significant and consistent ideological alignments correlated with the LLMs' geographic origins; U.S.-based models predominantly favored Pro-U.S. stances, while Chinese-origin models exhibited pronounced Pro-China biases. Notably, language and prompt framing substantially influenced model responses, with several LLMs exhibiting stance reversals based on prompt polarity or linguistic context. Additionally, we introduced comprehensive metrics to evaluate response consistency across languages and framing conditions, identifying variability and vulnerabilities in model behaviors. These results offer practical insights that can guide organizations and individuals in selecting LLMs best aligned with their operational priorities and geopolitical considerations, underscoring the importance of careful model evaluation in politically sensitive applications. Furthermore, the research highlights specific prompt structures and linguistic variations that can strategically trigger distinct responses from models, revealing methods for effectively navigating and influencing LLM outputs.

Chinese AI bot DeepSeek has disrupted the stock market, with US President Donald Trump calling its rise "a wake-up call" for the US tech industry. DeepSeek - which claims its model was made at a fraction of the cost of its rivals - has become the most downloaded free app in the US just a week after it was launched. The BBC's AI correspondent, Marc Cieslak discusses why the large language model has caused shockwaves.

But now it appears that access to large quantities of advanced compute resources is no longer the defining or sustainable advantage many had thought it would be. In fact, the capability gap between leading US and Chinese models has essentially disappeared, and in one important way the Chinese models may now have an advantage: They are able to achieve near equivalent results while using only a small fraction of the compute resources available to the leading Western labs. The AI competition is increasingly being framed within narrow national security terms, as a zero-sum game, and influenced by assumptions that a future war between the US and China, centered on Taiwan, is inevitable. The US has employed "chokepoint" tactics to limit China's access to key technologies like advanced semiconductors, and China has responded by accelerating its efforts toward self-sufficiency and indigenous innovation, which is causing US efforts to backfire. Recently even outgoing US Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo, a staunch advocate for strict export controls, finally admitted that using such controls to hold back China's progress on AI and advanced semiconductors is a "fool's errand."

Immense effort has been dedicated to minimizing the presence of harmful or biased generative content and better aligning AI output to human intention; however, research investigating the cultural values of LLMs is still in very early stages. Cultural values underpin how societies operate, providing profound insights into the norms, priorities, and decision making of their members. In recognition of this need for further research, we draw upon cultural psychology theory and the empirically-validated GLOBE framework to propose the LLM-GLOBE benchmark for evaluating the cultural value systems of LLMs, and we then leverage the benchmark to compare the values of Chinese and US LLMs. Our methodology includes a novel "LLMs-as-a-Jury" pipeline which automates the evaluation of open-ended content to enable large-scale analysis at a conceptual level. Results clarify similarities and differences that exist between Eastern and Western cultural value systems and suggest that open-generation tasks represent a more promising direction for evaluation of cultural values. We interpret the implications of this research for subsequent model development, evaluation, and deployment efforts as they relate to LLMs, AI cultural alignment more broadly, and the influence of AI cultural value systems on human-AI collaboration outcomes.