OpenAI identified a Chinese network that allegedly exploited its chatbot platform to influence US discussions on tariffs and artificial intelligence policy. The company's report highlighted attempts to amplify opposition to tariffs and shape narratives around data center development. OpenAI stated that it banned a group of Chinese-speaking users involved in these activities.

The report detailed two main clusters of activity. The first, termed the "Data Center Bandwagon" campaign, involved creating social media content suggesting that AI data center buildouts were causing electricity prices to rise for average families. The second cluster, dubbed "Tech and Tariffs," produced comments and images portraying US tariffs as efforts to gain an edge in technological competition.

Campaign Details

The "Tech and Tariffs" campaign was tied to a network of suspected inauthentic social media accounts that falsely claimed ChatGPT user data had been breached. A separate group of users, linked to a Chinese technology company with government ties, allegedly sought to influence US discussions on AI and data centers as several states weigh potential restrictions on new data center development.

The banned group leveraged ChatGPT to create slogans and cartoons critiquing trade and tech policy, which were later posted to various platforms. Additionally, the same group generated Chinese, Italian, and Japanese content for use in the comment sections of respective language articles.

Broader Context

These findings follow a CrowdStrike Holdings report revealing that over 58% of state-sponsored cyberattacks on tech companies, particularly those with AI assets, originate from China. The report suggested that US restrictions on China's access to AI training chips have slowed Beijing's technological advancement, leading to increased espionage targeting technology organizations.

Furthermore, the Defense Department recently updated its "1260H list," adding companies like Alibaba Group, Baidu Inc., and BYD, which it suspects have ties to China's military or defense-industrial sector.

Chris Miller, author of “Chip War,” stated that China has been underspending on artificial intelligence infrastructure for the past four years, suggesting Beijing does not share the urgency regarding artificial general intelligence (AGI) seen in the United States. He argued that the Chinese government does not view AI as being nearly as important as the US does, despite reports of a massive nationwide investment plan.

“If you thought AI was important and chips were an important ingredient, China’s been underspending for the last four years on AI,” Miller said during a Tuesday episode of TBPN. “The Chinese government just doesn’t really believe that AI is going to be nearly as important as we do.”

Investment Plan Analysis

Miller addressed reports indicating China is preparing a roughly $295 billion nationwide AI investment plan. He noted that this figure is spread over five years, which makes the annual spending lower than the capital expenditures of leading US cloud and AI companies. He questioned the lack of aggressive focus on AGI, asking, “The puzzle is why isn't Xi Jinping more AGI-pilled?”

Domestic Chip Ecosystem Focus

Regarding hardware procurement, Miller observed that Chinese firms have still not purchased Nvidia H200s despite the Trump administration permitting sales for roughly six months. He attributed this to Beijing pushing firms toward Huawei’s domestic chip ecosystem, citing possible data security concerns and fears of backdoors in foreign hardware.

The reported AI investment plan follows April data indicating China's chip exports rose to a record $31 billion, roughly doubling year over year.

Global Semiconductor Trends

Miller also stated that semiconductor spending as a share of GDP was roughly flat for two decades before nearly doubling over the past four years, driven entirely by AI demand. He noted that the industry remains constrained by manufacturing capacity, particularly at Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing, as well as bottlenecks in advanced packaging and related supply-chain segments. This dynamic has been described as a “bullwhip effect,” where demand fluctuations amplify further down the supply chain.