Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

ChatGPT broke the EU plan to regulate AI

politico.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 393 posts

Re: ChatGPT broke the EU plan to regulate AI

#101

Post by morpheuskafka »

anigbrowl wrote: post #95
TekMol wrote: post #31

Are there any internationally relevant internet companies in Europe? Spotify comes to mind. Then .. I can't think of anything. No search engine. No browser. No operating system. No social network. No ecommerce company. No cloud computing platform. No financial services company. No transportation company. No travel company. No nothing. Except for a $20B music aggregator, there is not a single sector of the web where E…

You are limiting your investigation to consumer brands. Lots of codecs (which support video infrastructure) originate in Europe, look up Fraunhofer institute for example. Python, the world's most popular programming language, invented and managed by a European. The world wide web originates in Switzerland. So does Linux. A lot of the technology you use every day comes from Europe, it just isn't in the form of a consu…

OP was asking about companies, not technologies. They weren't making the claim that say, academic research in codecs would be any worse off in the EU than elsewhere. The fact that Europe is good at inventing underlying technologies isn't necessarily a counterargument to their claim.

There are other internet/SaaS companies that are not consumer brands (ex. Cloudflare, Salesforce, etc.). But what you listed are not companies at all (other than some kind of small "company" that exists to support development resources for the project).

Re: ChatGPT broke the EU plan to regulate AI

#102

Post by anigbrowl »

morpheuskafka wrote: post #101
anigbrowl wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are limiting your investigation to consumer brands. Lots of codecs (which support video infrastructure) originate in Europe, look up Fraunhofer institute for example. Python, the world's most popular programming language, invented and managed by a European. The world wide web originates in Switzerland. So does Linux. A lot of the technology you use every day comes from Europe, it just isn't in the form of a consu…

OP was asking about companies, not technologies. They weren't making the claim that say, academic research in codecs would be any worse off in the EU than elsewhere. The fact that Europe is good at inventing underlying technologies isn't necessarily a counterargument to their claim. There are other internet/SaaS companies that are not consumer brands (ex. Cloudflare, Salesforce, etc.). But what you listed are not com…

And I'm saying that that's a foolishly narrow focus to determine who should get to shape internet policy.

Re: ChatGPT broke the EU plan to regulate AI

#103

Post by corbulo »

hourago wrote: post #42
juancn wrote: post #5

Why the need to bring it under control? Control from what? It's not the AI that's the issue, it's the use of it that's the problem. The law shouldn't focus on the AI, for example: >The regulation, proposed by the Commission in 2021, was designed to ban some AI applications like social scoring Ban social scoring, not the AI, the tool doesn't matter. Would it be good if it was computed by hand on paper instead of throu…

> Ban social scoring, not the AI, the tool doesn't matter. Automated human classification without recourse nor transparency is what the EU is against. "You cannot get a loan because the AI says so" is not acceptable. > Would it be good if it was computed by hand on paper instead of through AI? Yes. As a judge can check what information was used and what algorithm applied to get to a conclusion. And it may declare tha…

>Automated human classification without recourse nor transparency is what the EU is against. "You cannot get a loan because the AI says so" is not acceptable.

The credit score system already in place in the US is frequently as arbitrary in some cases already. You get punished for just looking at it. I don't think I need to preach to HN about that (crypto money and all that). Does Europe do it much differently?

Not an arguement for AI to do it, but the only reason why the current system is better (at least in the US) is its sluggish incompetence.

Re: ChatGPT broke the EU plan to regulate AI

#104

Post by edgineer »

barrkel wrote: post #74
concordDance wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "You cannot get a loan because the AI says so" is not acceptable. To me this makes it seem like acces to loans is a right,in which case the EU should make a lender of last resort that can loan to people who would otherwise get rejected.

How do you leap from banning black box AI decisions to thinking it means everything is allowed?

Perhaps the assumption is that humans functioning as black box loan deniers is also a problem.

Re: ChatGPT broke the EU plan to regulate AI

#105

Post by px43 »

barrkel wrote: post #74
concordDance wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "You cannot get a loan because the AI says so" is not acceptable. To me this makes it seem like acces to loans is a right,in which case the EU should make a lender of last resort that can loan to people who would otherwise get rejected.

How do you leap from banning black box AI decisions to thinking it means everything is allowed?

Haven't loan decisions always been black box? Sometimes they'll attribute decisions to credit scores, but those scoring systems have always been proprietary, and they won't even tell you what data your scoring is based on.

Re: ChatGPT broke the EU plan to regulate AI

#106

Post by ComplexSystems »

hourago wrote: post #42
juancn wrote: post #5

Why the need to bring it under control? Control from what? It's not the AI that's the issue, it's the use of it that's the problem. The law shouldn't focus on the AI, for example: >The regulation, proposed by the Commission in 2021, was designed to ban some AI applications like social scoring Ban social scoring, not the AI, the tool doesn't matter. Would it be good if it was computed by hand on paper instead of throu…

> Ban social scoring, not the AI, the tool doesn't matter. Automated human classification without recourse nor transparency is what the EU is against. "You cannot get a loan because the AI says so" is not acceptable. > Would it be good if it was computed by hand on paper instead of through AI? Yes. As a judge can check what information was used and what algorithm applied to get to a conclusion. And it may declare tha…

> Yes. As a judge can check what information was used and what algorithm applied to get to a conclusion. And it may declare that use of data or algorithm illegal.

A ban on "AI social scoring" would be neither necessary nor sufficient to make your scenario a reality.

Re: ChatGPT broke the EU plan to regulate AI

#107

Post by [deleted] »

hourago wrote: post #42
juancn wrote: post #5

Why the need to bring it under control? Control from what? It's not the AI that's the issue, it's the use of it that's the problem. The law shouldn't focus on the AI, for example: >The regulation, proposed by the Commission in 2021, was designed to ban some AI applications like social scoring Ban social scoring, not the AI, the tool doesn't matter. Would it be good if it was computed by hand on paper instead of throu…

> Ban social scoring, not the AI, the tool doesn't matter. Automated human classification without recourse nor transparency is what the EU is against. "You cannot get a loan because the AI says so" is not acceptable. > Would it be good if it was computed by hand on paper instead of through AI? Yes. As a judge can check what information was used and what algorithm applied to get to a conclusion. And it may declare tha…

[deleted]

Re: ChatGPT broke the EU plan to regulate AI

#108

Post by int_19h »

ip26 wrote: post #17
aftbit wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, which is also a valid argument. Tools have no alignment. The people using them do. Thus, one should regulate the people, not the tools.

How about harmful tools with no practical uses to the general public? Mortars, tanks, ketamine, ICBM GPS units… You’re taking an absolutist position, so I’d like to explore it.

FWIW mortars and tanks are legal for the general public to own in US, although it does involve a bunch of forms and tax stamps if they're operable. It doesn't seem to be a problem in practice, though - at least, I've never heard of a legally owned tank or mortar being used for criminal or other harmful purposes.

Re: ChatGPT broke the EU plan to regulate AI

#109

Post by kristofferR »

There's something immensely satisfying, yet creepy, about pressing to play the audio version of the article, and getting an AI voice back reading you this AI article.

A human wrote this article, but in some years, AI will be able to write artistically like this, and then AI will write and voice content to humans without human input.

Re: ChatGPT broke the EU plan to regulate AI

#110

Post by px43 »

anigbrowl wrote: post #102
morpheuskafka wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OP was asking about companies, not technologies. They weren't making the claim that say, academic research in codecs would be any worse off in the EU than elsewhere. The fact that Europe is good at inventing underlying technologies isn't necessarily a counterargument to their claim. There are other internet/SaaS companies that are not consumer brands (ex. Cloudflare, Salesforce, etc.). But what you listed are not com…

And I'm saying that that's a foolishly narrow focus to determine who should get to shape internet policy.

I think it's less about who can shape internet policy, and more of a rebuke on how technophobic regulation has led to Europe completely missing out on a key global industry despite many key innovations originating in Europe.
Post reply on HN