Prof. für Wirtschaftsrecht, Fachanwalt für Medizin- & IT-Recht // Prof. of Business Law, Specialist Attorney for Medical & IT Law // Private/r Account
Deutschland/Germany
Joined May 2018
- Tweets3.5K
- Following1K
- Followers359
- Likes18.7K
Uwe K. Schneider retweeted
This is a fantastic idea - a mass attempted replication of old findings of LLMs with new models. Much conventional wisdom is outdated.
Recent models no longer invent citations and both hallucination rates & stereotyping has dropped. But they are still sycophantic & lean left.
Uwe K. Schneider retweeted
We asked GPT-6 Astra to edit Qwen3.5-0.8B weights to improve math.
It directly changed only 0.016% of weights, fixing 0.8B's reasoning loops & improving math up to 6x and even instruction following 3x, without gradients or training.
We call this Weight-Space Programming: frontier LLMs can now natively read/write neural network weights! 🧵
Blog: rikiyat.github.io/blog/weigh…
Readers added context they thought people might want to know
LLM was given weights explicitly as text in prompt and used code/forward passes (per authors' logs) to ablate Qwen looping direction, a known thinking-mode issue per model card. Primarily fixed repetition in that mode, not general 'natively' improving weights/math.
rikiyat.github.io/blog/weight-sp…
github.com/RikiyaT/lm_und…
huggingface.co/Qwen/Qwen3.5-0…
huggingface.co/RikiyaT/Qwen3.…
Uwe K. Schneider retweeted
We have discovered a substantial number of vulnerabilities in the German legal system using LLMs.
These may enable access to confidential documents, travel without an otherwise required visa, enforceable leave for soldiers at NATO’s JSEC, and more.
Similar to computer systems, the written law can contain vulnerabilities that invite exploitation. In our blog post, we share a selection of vulnerabilities, and present potential exploits for each. To our knowledge, none of these have been previously recorded. We share only those vulnerabilities whose exploitation we believe would not cause serious harm.
blog post: felixringe.com/legal-exploit…
Uwe K. Schneider retweeted
This is one of the most important pieces of social science on human and AI interaction that I’ve seen in some time. Experts follow agentic advice the vast majority of the time (causally), but only a tiny fraction credit the agent—majority think they came to decision on their own volition.
Reminds me of the classic Nisbett and Wilson study on people following outside influence without realizing it
“ But as more work is handed to AI—including AI safety research—these judgment calls are the main levers for people's own values to influence outcomes.
If people defer to AI without noticing, then "human in the loop" might provide less assurance than people expect.”
Uwe K. Schneider retweeted
Gernot Döllner verkündet das Milliardeninvestment von Audi in den USA auf einer Wahlkampfveranstaltung des US-Präsidenten – und überschreitet damit eine Grenze. handelsblatt.com/meinung/kom…
Uwe K. Schneider retweeted
Outstanding, thought-provoking, beautifully written piece by @nfergus, @lisaklaassen @ericschmidt on AI as an imperial technology. "AI also has an inherent center-periphery structure. Control of frontier AI and its rewards are concentrated in a handful of firms in China and the United States. Everyone else is a
dependent user, whether a government running public services on a model it cannot inspect
or a firm building products on an interface that can be repriced or withdrawn overnight."
foreignaffairs.com/china/emp…
Uwe K. Schneider retweeted
Yesterday, the Council agreed its position on the proposal to simplify certain rules on GDPR, ePrivacy Directive and cybersecurity.
You will find in the Annex the text of the mandate for negotiations with the EP as agreed by the Council: linkedin.com/posts/luisalber…
Uwe K. Schneider retweeted
By every measure, Opus 4.8 beats human experts as peer reviewers in a study of 124 Harvard social science papers covering a range from statistical analyses to formal models to qualitative work.
As academics, we need to figure out how to adapt the practice of science to AI, fast.
Uwe K. Schneider retweeted
Just published @Nature
A 3-agent AI personal health agent exceeded performance of a large language model/chatbot and serves as a foundation to build on for integrating sensor data, medical knowledge and coaching
nature.com/articles/s41586-0…
Uwe K. Schneider retweeted
🚨New paper (possibly the most important one I have written yet).
We think that as early as 2027 or 2028, there might be a major AI-enabled terrorism event. We conducted a pre-mortem, made 9 falsifiable predictions, and wrote 2 concrete scenarios.
Led by @KamacheeMax.
Uwe K. Schneider retweeted
Yes! The three authoritarian powers in the world need to defeat Europe first, lest it can remain a beacon of democratic, liberal-republican hope!
There is nothing less at stake here.
I don’t think Europeans fully appreciate what is happening to the European Union right now.
The EU is under an extraordinary, multi-front assault, both from outside and from within. And I struggle to think of another period in its history when so many powerful actors had an interest in weakening it simultaneously.
Russia has spent years waging hybrid warfare against Europe. Weaponised migration, sabotage, cyberattacks, coordinated disinformation campaigns, bot networks and political interference. The objective is clear: undermine trust in democratic institutions, deepen social divisions and weaken European unity.
China has different motivations, primarily economic and geopolitical. A fragmented Europe is easier to pressure, easier to negotiate with individually and less capable of defending its economic interests.
And then there is the United States. Perhaps the most disturbing development of all.
Under Trump and MAGA, a country that helped rebuild the old continent and then spent decades supporting European integration now has an administration openly hostile to much of what the EU represents. Its own National Security Strategy even calls for cultivating resistance to Europe’s current political direction.
Think about that for a moment.
Meanwhile, within Europe, parts of the far right and far left amplify these divisions, whether through ideological alignment, political opportunism or outright sympathy for authoritarian regimes.
This doesn’t mean Russia, China and MAGA are all following some jointly coordinated master plan. They don’t have to. Their interests increasingly overlap, and Europe’s internal divisions make their work considerably easier.
What makes this particularly alarming is what is actually at stake.
For all its flaws, the EU remains one of the world’s most consequential projects built around liberal democracy, the rule of law, individual freedoms and cooperation between nations.
At a time when authoritarianism is gaining ground and even longstanding democracies are showing disturbing tendencies, that matters enormously.
Europe is far from perfect. Its bureaucracy, indecision and inability to act decisively are real problems. But the answer cannot be to retreat into 27 competing nation-states, each too small to meaningfully influence a world increasingly dominated by continental powers.
Quite the opposite.
Europe needs deeper integration, stronger common institutions, genuine strategic autonomy and the political courage to defend its interests and values.
Because fragmentation is precisely what so many external actors want.
And perhaps that’s the central irony of our time: people are being deliberately manipulated into believing that the reverse is true — that national identity and sovereignty can only be protected by weakening European cooperation. In reality, a divided Europe is less sovereign, less secure and far easier for outside powers to pressure. Therefore the very thing that will make Europe stronger is the thing its adversaries are working hardest to prevent.
A united Europe is a geopolitical power. A divided Europe is a collection of countries waiting to be played against one another.
Uwe K. Schneider retweeted
Look at the post below.
Yesterday, we reported that Europe’s four biggest mobile operators 🇩🇪🇫🇷🇪🇸🇬🇧are exploring a joint bid to take on Starlink: phones connected straight to satellites, no tower needed.
The replies came on cue: “Europe can’t launch. Europe has no satellites. Europe has no money. SpaceX has no competition. Period.”
We hear this every time Europe talks about tech independence. But are they right? 👇
❌ “Europe can’t launch.”
✅ True, SpaceX launches far more: 165 Falcon 9 flights in 2025. That gap is real.
But even Amazon booked 24 launches on Europe’s Ariane 6 for its own Starlink rival.
Ariane 6 has already put 100 of its satellites in orbit.
In September, @isaraerospace, a German 🇩🇪 startup, reached orbit. At the same time, Europe’s first reusable rocket prototype is on its pad in Sweden 🇸🇪.
And the @esa has put €900M+ behind a new generation of rockets. That’s more than twice the ~$400M NASA gave SpaceX to develop Falcon 9 and its Dragon capsule.
What will happen to American launchers once these are operational?
❌ “Europe doesn’t build satellites.”
✅ Galileo, Europe’s GPS, is the most precise satellite navigation system in the world. Over 4.5 billion devices use it. Probably yours too.
Finland’s 🇫🇮 @iceye_global runs the world’s largest fleet of radar satellites, which see through clouds and at night.
@Thales_Alenia_S, in Turin, Italy 🇮🇹, built over half of the International Space Station’s living space. It also built the current satellites of Iridium, the American satellite-phone network.
@AirbusSpace, @ThalesAerospace and @LDO_Space are merging their space businesses into one 25,000-strong champion. And IRIS², the EU’s own 348-satellite network, is moving to full deployment of its governments and defence infrastructure.
If Europe has “nothing”, why are NASA’s astronauts living in it and your phone navigating with it?
❌ “Europe doesn’t have the money.”
✅ EU households keep €12 trillion in cash and bank deposits. That’s more than Nvidia and Apple, the world’s two most valuable companies, combined. Enough to buy SpaceX five times over.
On top of that, Europeans hold $8 trillion in US stocks and bonds. For now.
Because something has changed. Every year, €300bn of European savings leaves the EU. Europe is done watching it go: it has started building a single market for savings and investment, so that European money grows European companies.
Some, like Danish 🇩🇰 pension funds, have already started dumping US government bonds.
What will happen the day Europe offers a real alternative to American financial markets?
❌ “Europe is years behind on innovation.”
✅ 3 of the last 4 Nobel laureates in physics were born in Europe 🇬🇧🇫🇷🇧🇪. All three did their prize-winning work at American universities.
The world’s first microprocessor, the chip that became the brain of every computer, was designed at Intel by an Italian 🇮🇹: Federico Faggin. Google’s AI lab, DeepMind, was born in London 🇬🇧. OpenAI was co-founded by scientists born in Poland 🇵🇱 and Slovakia 🇸🇰.
Now Washington is cutting research funding, and applications from US-based scientists to the European Research Council have more than doubled. The EU has proposed doubling its budget too.
Europe’s red tape can be cut with a vote.
Can America win back the trust it has destroyed by threatening, humiliating and insulting its allies?
❌ “Europe needs America more than America needs Europe.”
✅ Look closer.
In April, NASA flew astronauts around the Moon for the first time in over 50 years.
The module that powered their spacecraft, pushed it to the Moon and kept them alive was European, assembled in Bremen, Germany 🇩🇪.
NASA’s Webb telescope launched on a European Ariane 5, so precisely that its fuel should last about 20 years instead of 10.
And the world’s most advanced AI chips can only be made with machines from one company: ASML, in the Netherlands 🇳🇱.
We’ve seen this film before.
In 1970, American planemakers ruled the skies. Europeans pooled their strengths and built Airbus. Airbus has out-delivered Boeing every year since 2019.
The US just turned 250.
The University of Bologna, in Italy, was founded in 1088, 938 years ago. Europe has been written off many times.
Those trying to convince Europeans we can’t stand on our own forget who gave the world the Renaissance, the scientific revolution, the welfare state and the World Wide Web, born at CERN in Geneva 🇨🇭.
Betting against Europe isn’t analysis - it’s hubris.
And that arrogance is pushing European public opinion towards one conclusion: we’re done with America.
One day, those repeating “weak, dependent Europe” will wake up to a Europe running on its own rockets, satellites, capital and talent.
That day is closer than they think. 🇪🇺
Uwe K. Schneider retweeted
New essay for the @GoogleDeepMind Institute with James Manyika on AI x Science, "Bending the Curve of Discovery".
While accelerating existing scientific practices is certainly useful, the real promise of AI is its potential to act as an invention of a method of invention (IMI) a la Griliches--e.g., the microscope or statistical inference--which would unlock questions and whole modes of discovery that were previously beyond human reach.
Today, LLMs and specialized models like AlphaFold act as economic complements. LLMs handle analysis, coding, and writing, while specialized tools handle domain-specific predictions. Most handoffs between them run through the scientist.
What may the future of science look like? LLMs orchestrating those handoffs automatically--prompting specialized models, auditing outputs, and looping until either the question is answered or a non-automated stage is reached (e.g., wet lab testing). The scientist's role shifts from running each step to designing this loop. We saw a glimpse of this workflow with Anthropic’s enzyme discovery a few weeks ago, and we're seeing this in our own work too.
This raises foundational epistemic questions:
1. What will scientific understanding look like when discoveries are made by black-box models whose output is increasingly difficult to interpret?
2. How do we extract underlying mechanisms, not just outputs, as science becomes more automated? What will theory look like?
3. If AI automates the writing and junior lab work, how do we train the next generation of scientists to push the frontier?
4. What will motivate scientists in this epistemic reality?
There's an economics angle too. Hypothesis generation gets cheap, so bottlenecks move downstream to verification and to choosing which questions are worth asking. Realizing AI’s full potential will take investment in infrastructure and institutional reform--making this as much an organizational challenge as a technical one
We don't have the answers yet, and I'd love to hear what others think.
Paper here: bit.ly/ai-in-science
Uwe K. Schneider retweeted
Lets unpack the new Franco-German paper proposing fundamental changes to how the EU manages trade policy and which, if implemented, would mark the most significant change to EU-China policy in decades:
1. The timing reflects upcoming EU-China trade issues. The EU’s Trade Commissioner is scheduled to be in Beijing for talks later this week, EU leaders meet next week with China on the agenda, and the European Commission is slated to propose new EU trade instruments later this year.
2. Substantively, the paper proposes two fundamental shifts in the EU’s approach to trade. First, it calls for a sweeping expansion in the use of existing EU trade defenses (safeguards, anti-dumping, etc.)—not just more staff to bring more cases, but a broader focus on “sector-wide trade disruptions” rather than narrow categories of goods. This could mean wide-ranging action on broad categories of chemicals, rather than a handful of individual compounds.
3. Second, the paper proposes new trade tools that would empower the EU to (a) require EU companies to diversify their supply chains and (b) create a new “instrument for decisive and systemic reaction”—a sort of rapid reaction mechanism—that would “allow for a decisive and systemic reaction to cases where third countries seek to undermine the restoration of a level playing field and fair market conditions by political or economic means.” The goal of this new instrument would be escalation dominance: if the EU acts against specific Chinese imports and China retaliates, the EU could quickly escalate further—ideally deterring Chinese retaliation in the first place.
4. To make the rapid reaction mechanism credible, France and Germany propose an important procedural shift. Today, deploying the EU’s “anti-coercion instrument”—extremely powerful in theory but never actually used—requires a majority of member states to affirmatively sign off, and in practice the EU seeks broad member state consensus on major trade actions. That high bar both erodes the credibility of EU threats—Beijing doubts the EU will, in fact, organize itself to act—and makes tough action harder. Under the proposal, the Commission itself could deploy the rapid reaction mechanism unless a qualified majority of member states blocks it.
5. The proposals are aimed first and foremost at China, but France and Germany also see the US in the background. Commentary understandably focuses on China, but the paper is “country agnostic,” does not name China, and several of its proposals could be used against the US. The rapid reaction mechanism, for example, could give the EU a better way to retaliate against new Trump tariffs.
6. Beyond subsidies and regulations that distort trade, the paper also flags currency values as a driver of the EU’s industrial challenges. Down the road, I could potentially see the US and Europe discussing cooperation on currency issues.
7. There is a big gap between a proposal and actual EU action, and smaller member states will have views. But the EU is clearly beginning to make fundamental changes to its approach to trade.
Uwe K. Schneider retweeted
In diesem Leitartikel habe ich etwas getan, was Dritten zufolge selten bei mir vorkommt: Ich lobe die Bundesregierung. Merz ist in der China-Politik ein wirklich großer Wurf gelungen. Nur nimmt die deutsche Öffentlichkeit davon seltsam wenig Notiz.
handelsblatt.com/meinung/kom…
Uwe K. Schneider retweeted
Ich kann mich dem nur anschließen. Dieses Papier ist eine ökonomische Zeitenwende, eine Neujustierung der deutschen China-Politik, vielleicht sogar eine historische Kehrtwende. Das alles wäre bis vor kurzem noch absolut undenkbar gewesen.
Uwe K. Schneider retweeted
‼️ Sehr eindringlich warnende Worte vom BND-Chef: Moskau stelle uns auf die Probe und wette auf unsere Schwäche. Denn Putin sei über den Punkt hinaus, wo er seinen Krieg einfach beenden könne, ohne sich selbst zu gefährden, sagt Martin Jäger bei der Geheimdienst-Anhörung im Bundestag.
Sein Eingangsstatement im Detail:
— „Deutschland ist in Gefahr, in einen gewaltsamen Konflikt mit Russland zu geraten. Der Anschlagsversuch in Leipzig ist nur ein Beispiel dafür. Von keinem anderen Land geht derzeit eine so direkte, umfassende und konkrete Bedrohung gegen Deutschland aus.“
— „Nicht wir haben diese Konfrontation gesucht: Russland drängt sie uns auf, sieht in uns einen Hauptgegner. Weil wir Russlands revisionistisch-expansive Politik und den Angriffskrieg gegen die Ukraine nicht hinnehmen, weil wir der russischen Einschüchterung unserer Bündnispartner im Baltikum und anderswo in Europa entgegentreten.
Deutschland ist zu einem Haupthindernis russischer hegemonialer Machtprojektion in Europa und damit zur Zielfläche russischen Handelns geworden. Wer sich nicht fügt, wird zum Gegner. So lautet die Moskauer Lesart.“
— Dies bedeute: „Russland stellt uns auf die Probe und beobachtet genau, wie wir mit dieser Situation umgehen. Jedes Zeichen von Wankelmut lädt aus Sicht der Führung im Kreml dazu ein, den Druck auf Deutschland weiter zu erhöhen.“
— „Präsident Putin ist über den Punkt hinaus, wo er den Druck auf die Ukraine einfach einstellen könnte, ohne seine Machtbasis im Inneren zu gefährden. Er muss einen Erfolg in der Ukraine vorweisen, der die bisher erbrachten immensen Opfer aus russischer Sicht rechtfertigt. Das setzt ihn unter Zugzwang.“
— „In Moskau herrscht aber keineswegs Kopflosigkeit. Die russische Führung weiß um die Begrenztheit ihrer militärischen und wirtschaftlichen Mittel. Sie kompensiert eigene Schwäche durch Repression im Inneren, durch die konsequente Ausrichtung der Ressourcen auf die Kriegsführung und — das ist entscheidend, — durch Entschlossenheit und Risikobereitschaft.“
— „Mehr als Material, Geld und Menschenleben zählen der russischen Führung Willenskraft und Opfermut. Das sind die Währungen, in denen Russland handelt. Sie werden auch uns in Rechnung gestellt.
Moskau agiert in der Annahme, dass wir russischen Druck und russischer Einschüchterung letztlich nicht standhalten werden. Moskau wettet auf unserer Schwäche.“
— Worauf müssen wir uns einstellen? Jäger nennt vier Punkte:
1. „Russland legt es darauf an, die Ukraine im kommenden Winter in die Knie zu zwingen. Wir müssen mit russischen Attacken von einer Härte und Brutalität rechnen, wie wir sie bisher so in der Breite nicht gesehen haben. Der Krieg in der Ukraine tritt in eine neue, überaus gefährliche Phase ein.“
2. „Russland versucht zweitens, westliche Produktion und Lieferung von Waffen und Wehrmaterial womöglich zu unterbinden, auch kinetisch, auch bei uns.“
3. „Drittens: Russland zielt darauf, Europas politische Unterstützung für die Ukraine zu brechen. Wir müssen uns auf Einschüchterungsversuche und weitere Einmischung einstellen. Vermutlich wird es auch erneut nukleare Drohungen geben. Dem müssen wir standhalten.“
4. „Aktuell sehen wir, viertens, keine Hinweise auf einen groß angelegten Angriff Russlands gegen Nato-Gebiet. Allerdings könnte es, insbesondere im Baltikum, zu niedrigschwelligen militärischen Aktivitäten Russlands kommen. Und in diesem Kontext lassen sich auch False Flag Operations nicht ausschließen.“
Zusammenfassend: „Russland führt einen Schattenkrieg gegen uns“, sagt Jäger. „Dieser unerklärte Krieg ist nicht mit herkömmlichen militärischen oder rechtlichen Kategorien zu fassen. Wir befinden uns nicht im Verteidigungsfall und werden trotzdem angegriffen. Ein Schattenkrieg eben.“
„Die russischen Geheimdienste agieren hochprofessionell und rücksichtslos. Die Gefahr von Anschlägen gegen Ziele in Deutschland ist weiter real und gegenwärtig. Dem müssen wir uns entgegenstellen.“ Der BND sehe sich als „erste Verteidigungslinie“ (Verweis auf Geheimdienstreform mit neuen Befugnissen).
Uwe K. Schneider retweeted
Has AI hit the labor market yet? @alexolegimas and my verdict after ~20 papers: not yet in aggregate. Unemployment and layoffs show almost nothing. But AI may already be cutting junior hiring in exposed white-collar jobs. Remote work may explain part of that decline.
A 🧵
Uwe K. Schneider retweeted
Editorial @Nature this week calls out lack of real world data for AI medical algorithms
nature.com/articles/d41586-0…
Uwe K. Schneider retweeted
Automating more and more of the AI R&D could lead to AI progress radically accelerating in a very risky uncontrolled “intelligence explosion”. Many collaborators and I assess the evidence and offer policy recommendations in the paper below.
Could automating AI R&D radically accelerate AI progress in an “intelligence explosion”?
Preliminary evidence suggests that it could.
In a new paper with authors across academia, civil society, and frontier AI companies (including @dawnsongtweets @merettm @jackclarkSF @Yoshua_Bengio @geoffreyhinton ), we assess the evidence & offer policy recommendations 🧵
