- Superintelligence
- Posts
- Superintelligence Europe — No. 009
Superintelligence Europe — No. 009
The Commission missed its second AI Act guidance deadline. Kandou AI raises $225M to rewire data centres with copper. European finance gets its clearest AI cyber warning yet. Plus: the week in review.
Everything that moved in European AI on Sunday 29 March · Across all 27 EU member states | ||||||
| ||||||
Issue No. 009 — Monday, 30 March 2026 Sunday brought the week’s reflective close — but not a quiet one. The most significant story of the day is one that sits beneath the surface of every European AI infrastructure debate: the European Commission missed its second consecutive deadline for issuing critical AI Act guidance, creating compliance uncertainty for thousands of businesses preparing for August 2026 obligations. Meanwhile, the week’s funding recap was dominated by Kandou AI — a Swiss EPFL spin-out that has raised $225 million to challenge the assumption that AI data centres need optical interconnects. And Europe’s financial sector received its clearest warning yet about AI-enabled cyber threats heading into the second half of 2026. Infrastructure, implementation gaps, and the week in capital. Four stories. Your Monday morning briefing starts here. | ||||||
| ||||||
Lead · EU-wide · AI Act Implementation 01The European Commission has now missed two consecutive deadlines for issuing critical AI Act guidance — and the August 2026 compliance clock is still running The European Commission has now missed its second consecutive deadline for publishing critical guidance that businesses need to comply with the AI Act’s high-risk system requirements. The February 2, 2026 deadline — set under the Act itself — came and went without the practical implementation guidelines that providers and deployers of high-risk AI systems had been counting on to structure their compliance programmes. This follows the Commission’s failure to meet the same category of obligations in the prior cycle. The timing creates a structural contradiction at the heart of EU AI governance. On one hand, the Parliament voted this week to delay high-risk AI obligations to December 2027 — precisely because standards and guidance were not ready. On the other, thousands of businesses are currently attempting to prepare compliance programmes in the absence of the official interpretation that would tell them what compliance actually looks like. The Digital Omnibus delay buys time at the legislative level. The missing guidance creates uncertainty at the operational level. For companies with compliance cycles of twelve months or more, the gap between those two things is already costing money. What Was Missed The AI Act required the Commission to publish practical implementation guidelines for high-risk AI system providers and deployers by February 2, 2026. The guidelines were intended to cover risk classification, documentation requirements, conformity assessment procedures, and how the AI Act interacts with sector-specific legislation in areas including healthcare, employment, and law enforcement. None of these have been published. The Commission’s AI Office has confirmed the delay but has not given a revised timeline. The Simplification Paradox This week the Parliament voted to simplify the AI Act. At the same time, the Commission is failing to deliver the basic implementation infrastructure that makes the existing Act workable. Simplification at the legislative level and operational clarity at the guidance level are not the same thing. European businesses need both. Right now they have neither on schedule. | ||||||
Capital · Switzerland · AI Infrastructure / Semiconductors 02Kandou AI raises $225M to challenge optics with copper — the week’s standout European infrastructure bet Sources: The Next Web · Kandou AI official announcement · Week of 23–29 March 2026 The week’s most technically significant European AI funding story was picked up in this Sunday’s TNW weekly recap: Kandou AI, a fabless semiconductor company headquartered in Saint-Sulpice, Switzerland and spun out of EPFL in 2011, closed an oversubscribed $225 million Series A round led by Maverick Silicon, with strategic participation from SoftBank, Synopsys, Cadence Design Systems, and Alchip Technologies. The round values the company at $400 million. The company’s proposition sits at the most contested technical frontier in AI infrastructure: the interconnect bottleneck. As AI clusters scale to tens of thousands of GPUs, the constraint on performance is no longer raw compute but the speed and efficiency with which data moves between processors and memory. The prevailing industry response has been to shift from copper to optical interconnects — a transition that is expensive, complex, and still maturing. Kandou AI’s bet is that copper, if signalled correctly using its patented Chord technology, can match or exceed the performance of optics at a fraction of the cost and power consumption. Its claimed figures — ten times lower power than optical alternatives, bandwidth beyond 448 gigabits per second — if they hold at commercial scale, would represent a significant challenge to the billions currently being invested in optical alternatives. Why the Investor Mix Matters Synopsys and Cadence — two of the three co-investors alongside SoftBank — are the dominant providers of the electronic design automation tools used to design virtually every advanced AI chip on the planet. Their participation is not passive financial exposure. It signals a likely path toward integration of Kandou AI’s serialiser/deserialiser IP into the design flows their customers use. For European AI infrastructure, a Swiss chip company with EPFL roots and the world’s top two EDA providers on its cap table is a meaningful signal about where the next layer of sovereign compute investment could originate. | ||||||
Risk · EU-wide · Financial Sector / Cybersecurity 03AI is transforming the 2026 cyber risk landscape for European banks and insurers — on both sides of the attack Source: European Financial Review · 29 March 2026 The European Financial Review published a detailed risk analysis on Sunday documenting how AI is reshaping the cyber threat environment for European banks, insurers, and financial market infrastructure heading into the second half of 2026. The piece covers three distinct attack vectors that AI has materially worsened: deepfake-enabled fraud targeting executive authorisation processes, automated phishing campaigns using personalised financial data at scale, and model poisoning attacks targeting the AI systems that financial institutions are themselves deploying for fraud detection and credit scoring. The analysis lands against a specific regulatory backdrop. DORA — the Digital Operational Resilience Act — entered full application for EU financial entities in January 2026, requiring robust ICT risk management, incident reporting, and third-party oversight. But DORA was designed before AI-enabled attacks reached their current sophistication. The report argues that governance frameworks need updating faster than the regulatory cycle can accommodate, and that the AI Office’s focus on the AI Act’s high-risk classification framework is not addressing the financial sector’s most immediate AI risk exposure. The Double-Edged Dynamic European financial institutions are simultaneously deploying AI for defence — anomaly detection, transaction monitoring, document verification — and becoming more vulnerable through it. AI models embedded in core financial workflows create new attack surfaces: a poisoned fraud detection model can be made to approve fraudulent transactions; a compromised credit scoring model can be steered to systematically mis-price risk. The same capability that makes AI valuable in finance makes it a target. This is the asymmetry that regulators are currently underequipped to address. | ||||||
04 · Signal — Verified Voices Credible accounts and publications that shaped Sunday’s European AI conversation. Filtered for genuine signal. @thenextweb European tech media Published the week’s definitive European funding recap on Sunday. The Kandou AI deep-dive analysis was the most substantive piece of infrastructure journalism in the week’s coverage — going well beyond the press release to examine the copper vs. optical debate, the EDA investor signal, and the 15-year technical history behind the Chord signalling IP. @vucense AI law & policy analysis Published the clearest account of the Commission’s missed guidance deadline on Sunday. Vucense’s coverage connects the operational gap to the broader implementation timeline in a way that most Brussels-focused outlets have not — making it the most practically useful AI Act analysis published this week for compliance teams. @EuropFinReview European Financial Review The cyber risk piece published Sunday drew significant amplification from financial sector compliance and risk management accounts — an audience that rarely engages with general AI coverage. The DORA-meets-AI angle is underreported in mainstream tech media and well-served by specialist financial press. This is the kind of story that lands quietly on Sunday and becomes a Monday morning board agenda item. | ||||||
The Week That Was · 23–29 March 2026 The defining week in European AI this year — a brief recap before Monday begins This was not a typical week. Seven days produced the sharpest legislative action the European Parliament has taken on AI harm, the first binding judicial order against an AI image generator on the continent, the announcement of Europe’s first commercial robotaxi service, and the most explicit transatlantic confrontation over AI regulation of the year so far. For readers coming to this briefing fresh, here is the shape of the week:
|
The AI your stack deployed is losing customers.
You shipped it. It works. Tickets are resolving. So why are customers leaving?
Gladly's 2026 Customer Expectations Report uncovered a gap that most CIOs don't see until it's too late: 88% of customers get their issues resolved through AI — but only 22% prefer that company afterward. Resolution without loyalty is just churn on a delay.
The difference isn't the model. It's the architecture. How AI is integrated into the customer journey, what it hands off and when, and whether the system is designed to build relationships or just close tickets.
Download the report to see what consumers actually expect from AI-powered service — and what the data says about the platforms getting it right.
If you're responsible for the infrastructure, you're responsible for the outcome.

