Holger Hestermeyer

Holger Hestermeyer

@hhesterm.bsky.social

Professor of Int’l & EU Law, Diplomatic Academy Vienna. Past: Prof., founding Director CIGAD at King's College London, specialist adviser House of Lords EU Select Committee, Référendaire CJEU

20K followers4K following3.7K posts

Ok, so Audi invests billions for a plant that will not produce technologies adapted to the future. Ok, so they on Trump‘s bandwagon at precisely the moment it’s losing momentum. What makes me angry is this:

Ok, so Audi invests billions for a plant that will not produce technologies adapted to the future. Ok, so they on Trump‘s bandwagon at precisely the moment it’s losing momentum. What makes me angry is this:

they put out a note saying this was not partisan positioning. Dr. Döllner: you spoke at a Trump rally two weeks before the midterms. Did you think it was an ice cream convention?

I just want to point out how weird it is that a company makes a public statement before its IPO saying, de facto, that its (only?) product is so dangerous that it might end mankind altogether. And it will then make billions off its IPO. www.bbc.com/news/article...

bbc.comAnthropic warns of AI's 'catastrophic risks' ahead of blockbuster share listingThe company will be the first true artificial intelligence company to go public as tech firms continue to invest heavily in AI.

The pro-autocratic P5 China, Russia, US might move against the regional rotation (demanding a LatAm candidate) and against the wish for a woman. Orban‘s record of corruption in office bodes poorly for his capacity to do the job (his perk: immunity). Will France and the UK step up to protect the UN?

Finbarr Bermingham@fbermingham.bsky.social

Washington plans for Viktor Orban to be a "joint candidate" for the US, China and Russia to be UN secretary general, WSJ reports www.wsj.com/opinion/...

I mean, there is an academic curiosity that this article triggers: what will the ‚anti-globalist‘ right do, if suddenly their governments are leftist, but the UNSG is a right-wing autocrat?

The correct legal approach to this seems to be that when platforms start favouring some content over other, they don‘t deserve immunity for third party content on the basis that they are just platforms. They should become liable. finance.yahoo.com/media-advert...

finance.yahoo.comMeta Unseats Musk as Tech Villain for Lula in Brazil’s ElectionA new villain is emerging in the closing stretch of Brazil’s bitterly contested presidential election: Meta Platforms Inc.

So… what does this even mean grammatically? Apart from stating with explicit certainty that Anthropic knows it is selling a product that is dangerous - and nevertheless sells it.

This post is unavailable.

The deference usually given to the executive is unwarranted in the case of the Trump administration.

Gillian Brockell@gillianbrockell.com

HOLY SHIT. In a sworn statement yesterday, an ICE agent told a federal judge that an ICE flight to Equatorial Guinea had been cancelled and so couldn't be used to bring Ahmed Soliman back to the United States. The plane just landed in Equatorial Guinea. prospect.org/2026/10/23/t...

I'm not the only one who thinks so... here's a lawsuit for you www.cnbc.com/2026/09/30/o...

cnbc.comOpenAI is sued over rogue AI Hugging Face cyberattackThe lawsuit appears to be the first publicly reported case seeking to hold an AI developer liable for an incident caused by rogue systems.
Holger Hestermeyer@hhesterm.bsky.social

If you build a contraption that hurts your neighbour, you are liable. But if you build an AI software that allows attackers to down a good part of western government services along with university services etc., you become a billionaire and are not liable for anything? Surely that cannot be right.

If you build a contraption that hurts your neighbour, you are liable. But if you build an AI software that allows attackers to down a good part of western government services along with university services etc., you become a billionaire and are not liable for anything? Surely that cannot be right.

Holger Hestermeyer reposted

The US government has launched an investigation into nine universities’ employment of international researchers. Vice-president JD Vance said these universities are using too many J-1 #visas, often used by #postdocs in the US. @nature.com

nature.comUS government probe into postdoc visas worries scientistsThe administration says that the universities being investigated are using the visas to undercut wages for US nationals, but researchers say that restricting international applications could harm scie...

I think that Ms. Abdi-Wali seems to have worked hard, that the UK has demonstrated its capacity for integration, that her story is examplary for how migrants can work to improve British society. THIS is the dream. Thanks to Mr. Goodwin for highlighting this positive migration story.

The confirmation that none of the two sides had agreed to the ceasefire Potus announced.

Olga Nesterova@onestpress.onestnetwork.com

Q: You said Russia and Ukraine agreed to a ceasefire, but both sides said they have not agreed to that TRUMP: Well they agreed, you know why? Because I said 'you agree.' That's why.

It almost seems like Potus announced a ceasefire without speaking to either of the sides about it. But it did produce clips of Trump announcing peace that can be used on networks for the midterms, one assumes.

Jana Puglierin@jpuglierin.bsky.social

President Zelensky at #WSF2026: President Putin obviously doesn‘t read Truth Social. From the moment Trump announced the energy ceasefire (that was not discussed with Ukraine but would be very welcome) to this morning, Russia continued to target Ukrainian energy infrastructure.

I have now deleted my tweet about the decline in Russian bots and the consequent decline in disinformation. The graph seemed more than dubious if you look at the dates. But still: worth investigating if and by how much the number of disinformation bots declined.

Sergey pointing out the way forward for the ICC. One of the core points: the EU has to invoke the blocking statute.

Sergey Vasiliev@sevslv.bsky.social

Performative support rings hollow unless accompanied by a coherent, coordinated strategy for countering US coercion and protecting the ICC’s independence. "How the ICC can be saved" - my op-ed with Triestino Mariniello in @AJEnglish:

If you are looking for an explanation of why Trump is doing what he is doing look no further than the midterms. Trump's two futures are a) another two years of enriching himself and his family shamelessly at the cost of the USA or b) Congress blocking his actions and possible prosecutions.

3) Which leads us to a downside of not admitting interference. The UK became a helpless target of influence campaign. Unable to explore precisely how they work, it became unable to defend itself.

And so it took 10 years to state the blatently obvious. It also needed a politician willing to say: why not go back to the EU. Whether it will happen or not: now finally the UK can try to counter such influence campaigns. Lots of work lies ahead.

2) The reason it was so hard to admit the interference - and why no PM was willing to do so - is that while this finding discredits further the most significant constitutional decision the UK took in decades, there is no remedy to this finding.

Why is there no remedy? There is no way of telling whether the meddling affected the outcome. Euroscepticism in the UK was strong even without meddling. So the risk was that the debate would harm society even more - with no upside.

1) The statement is no surprise. Russia was known to have interferred in other elections at the time, its enmity towards the EU was known, its desire to weaken the EU and the western alliance was known. It would have been a surprise if Russia had not tried to affect it.

The Senator is correct. And to illustrate the consequences: Europe will have to make sure that there are EU alternatives to Visa, to Microsoft etc. Trump consciously hurts the US to enable crimes.

Senator Chris Van Hollen@vanhollen.senate.gov

As Trump himself said, this entire campaign is about protecting Netanyahu.   Words of condemnation aren't enough, ICC members must take action to defend the rule of law. Remember, ICC prosecutors have the authority to open criminal investigations against ANYONE who obstructs justice.

Following US regulatory models is looking less and less attractive

An important statement of support of the ICC 1 along with a commitment to keep the ICC alive.

Olga Nesterova@onestpress.onestnetwork.com

"We, the undersigned States Parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), reaffirm our continued and unwavering support for the independence, impartiality, and integrity of the ICC." JOINT STATEMENT by CANADA, DENMARK, GERMANY, FRANCE, ITALY, JAPAN, NETHERLANDS, UK

View full thread

AI comes with hypothetical risks. It also comes with actual grave environmental costs and societal harms right now. It creates massive wealth for a select group of people. On the plus side it enables inventions, some of them very helpful. /7

View full thread

The reality is that the wealth goes to a very limited group of people. The Musks, the Zuckerbergs, the Altmans. None of them have ever shown any interest in sharing wealth. Not even if they have a trillion. Instead, they invest hundred of millions to prevent fair taxation. /4

The utopia is not remotely what we are heading for. None of the people proclaiming it are working towards it. They are working towards personal wealth. The utopia that noone needs to work and everyone is in an age of abundance is, at the very best, a lie they tell themselves. /5

For a good part of the show they discuss the utopia that the AI barons are selling us: that jobs will no longer be necessary, that we'll live in an age and a time of plenty and everyone has a high income. Stewart reasonably argues that that is not human. But also: it is utterly besides the point /2

The very premise is a lie. The reality is this: jobs will get cut. Who will make the money? AI company through licensing their product. So how, I ask you, does this lead to a universal high income? Will the AI companies dish it out? The AI barons? The US state? NONE of this is realistic /3