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

261–270 of 393 posts

Re: ChatGPT broke the EU plan to regulate AI

#261

Post by usrbinbash »

nektro wrote: post #206
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…

> It's not the AI that's the issue, it's the use of it that's the problem. this is exactly what people against gun control say

a) The use of guns cannot be regulated effectively without physically removing guns from a society.

b) One of the first and foremost items on gun-regulation todo-lists is to get rid of the kind of guns with the specific use-case of making killing people as easy as possible, aka. miltary weapons, automated weapons, easily concealed weapons, etc. So the regulations against guns are already targeting use-cases.

c) Physically controlling guns is a proven method, its effectiveness is supported by decades of evidence in countries implementing it.

Re: ChatGPT broke the EU plan to regulate AI

#262

Post by janosdebugs »

XorNot wrote: post #228
bobthepanda wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The original regulation doesn’t actually sound that vague. From TFA > The regulation, proposed by the Commission in 2021, was designed to ban some AI applications like social scoring, manipulation and some instances of facial recognition. It would also designate some specific uses of AI as “high-risk,” binding developers to stricter requirements of transparency, safety and human oversight. The issue is that as writte…

That's still focusing on the wrong problem though: if Madison Square garden had simply told security to eject the lawyer, it would be the same issue. The problem isn't facial recognition, it's that they thought they could or should do this at all.

Not entirely. ML algorithms make these processes ridiculously effective. You no longer need to expend the time of a human to make that decision.

Re: ChatGPT broke the EU plan to regulate AI

#263

Post by batmansmk »

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. Ban shooting people, not the guns, the tool doesn’t matter. :) sorry to be facetious but I find you idealist in your view.

Modern form of AI has regulatory issues: some can’t be audited easily, some can’t be deterministic, some can’t be fair, some use biased data, some can’t be proven to work accurately enough for critical missions.

We already regulate the way we make various decision by law. For instance, we regulate how public market are assigned: price needs to make for 30% of the decision, social impact 20% etc. If the tool cannot demonstrate it considers it with those weights, it shall be banned. You cannot expect judges to understand this complexity. It needs to be codified prior to the issue.

Re: ChatGPT broke the EU plan to regulate AI

#265

Post by sensanaty »

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…

I guess mass, unchecked data harvesting is a "waft of fresh air" to yanks?

Makes sense once you consider the usual target demographic of HN, which is the temporarily temporarily embarrassed millionaire type.

Here's to hoping that the EU does indeed kill the cancer that is A"I" before it ruins the world with all of the "fresh" air it blows over the entire internet.

Re: ChatGPT broke the EU plan to regulate AI

#266

Post by college_physics »

The EU can keep chasing the symptoms of the disease pretending it is keeping busy. The vast range of possibilities that can be expressed in software and algorithms will keep throwing such "surprises".

If you really want a healthy "digital society", which is one of the two major stated policy pillars of the EU (the other one being sustainability) you have to create a healthy digital economy, with more informed users, less obfuscation and hype, less oligopolistic, with more independent controllers.

Re: ChatGPT broke the EU plan to regulate AI

#267

Post by kelnos »

corbulo wrote: post #103
hourago wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

> You get punished for just looking at it.

Not completely false, but misleading: you get penalized if a lender looks at it with the express purpose of using it to decide whether or not to offer you credit (called a "hard pull"). You looking at your own credit report does not penalize you, and certain other activities (like getting pre-approved for a loan) won't either.

The penalty for hard pulls isn't that bad, anyway, and disappears after a relatively short while. I currently have 7 hard pulls (I've been chasing credit card rewards offers lately), but my overall credit score is still over 800.

Re: ChatGPT broke the EU plan to regulate AI

#268

Post by GuB-42 »

anigbrowl wrote: post #91
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…

What an absurd argument. Social scoring doesn't get computer by hand on paper because it isn't efficient to do so. Introduce automation and it suddenly becomes practical. Same with mass surveillance and a bunch of other stuff, eg scams: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35033971 the amplification factor works for the good and for the bad, so you need to focus just on the bad That's just hand-waving. You have no pl…

You absolutely don't need a computer to do social scoring. Computers let you take more parameters into account, and do more complex calculations, but you can do basic social scoring by hand, we have been doing that since civilization existed, in a more or less formal way. Traditionally through ancestry (and by extension, race).

And the way we prevent abuse is with anti-discrimination laws, and AI won't change the deals here. If, for example one notices that a company doesn't hire black people even though there are plenty of them applying with suitable qualifications. Regulators could step in and ask what's wrong, and I doubt "that's my AI" will be a satisfactory answer, but neither is "that's Bob".

Re: ChatGPT broke the EU plan to regulate AI

#269

Post by kelnos »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #216
schrodinger wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I certainly don’t love the system, but the difference is “checking credit score in order to take more credit (eg a loan or credit card)” (hard) vs “checking credit score for my own knowledge” (soft). This distinction feels reasonable to me.

How is it reasonable? Anyone checking your credit score already knows that you're applying for new credit, because you're applying for new credit with them . Dinging your score over that only punishes you for soliciting credit offers from multiple lenders at once so you can choose the best terms. Which ought to be an antitrust violation.

That's usually not the case, though. I was just looking around at Chase's credit report tracking thing, and they have this to say on credit inquiries:

> The VantageScore credit score model takes rate shopping, e.g., for a mortgage or car loan, into consideration. All inquiries for mortgages, auto loans and major credit cards that appear in your credit file within a 14-day window are interpreted as a single inquiry.

I believe that's the case for the FICO score algorithm as well. I think a 14-day window is probably too short, but it likely does cover most situations.

Re: ChatGPT broke the EU plan to regulate AI

#270

Post by kelnos »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #243
dwallin wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a defense against the double spend problem. It minimizes potential timing issues that could allow someone to simultaneously taking out multiple credit lines without the ability to properly evaluate the risk.

But it isn't, because the reduction in credit score from the query doesn't necessarily prohibit two simultaneous loans, it just makes the terms worse (and so makes default more likely). And there are obviously better ways to prevent "double spend," like reporting the new loan being granted , which actually should reduce the credit score due to the new debt. It's not as if we can't make computers capable of updating t…

The interesting thing I've noticed is that opening a new credit account often doesn't actually get that information on your credit report. It sometimes only shows up after you've made the first payment (either loan or credit card). I wonder if that's why the system dings you for too many hard credit inquiries. I agree with you that there's no reason why this couldn't be fixed, though.
Post reply on HN