Live data from Hacker News

Sam Altman Says OpenAI Will Leave the EU If There's Any Real AI Regulation

gizmodo.com

121–130 of 210 posts

Re: Sam Altman Says OpenAI Will Leave the EU If There's Any Real AI Regulation

#122
post #63

In traditional European fashion the EU is again likely to crush any emerging European AI venture with overburdening regulation while companies in the US flourish. For decades now the American approach of wait and see has proven superior (with few exceptions for sectors like pharmaceuticals). When the government waits with regulation until more clarity has been established to what the actual business models are going…

Eh, I'm not convinced.

I do pay for ChatGPT, but I'm not onboard with corporate whining by spoiled CEOs from across the pond. I certainly am not a fan of US lax regulatory approach that only seem to ever favor corporations in detriment of the population with this lame excuse of not scaring away poor corporations.

If adjusting to regulation is impossible, don't do business here. It's alright.

Re: Sam Altman Says OpenAI Will Leave the EU If There's Any Real AI Regulation

#123
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tell investors you're throwing away 10% of the market and they will fire you > The EU's makes up around 15-20% of world GDP depending on how you measure it, but that's subject to disproportionality high taxes and compliance costs. That would have to be corrected for tech spendings, for example the fact asia produces most of the electronics have zero effect on facebook's business profits.

Google search and many other big tech divisions already did that with China. When a country/region deviates from the rest of the world in a big way there comes a point at which you can't offer the same products and services as other markets.

I'm still waiting for Google/Facebook to leave Europe.

Never seems to happen, despite the incessant whining. Maybe the fines were not heavy enough.

Re: Sam Altman Says OpenAI Will Leave the EU If There's Any Real AI Regulation

#124
post #87
post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uber and Airbnb?

Uber brought ride sharing and cracked the taxi market wide open - perhaps to the benefit of riders. Airbnb is also a boon for travellers looking to stay cheap, and a boon for property owners to cash in on underutilized real estate. The "harm" that has been cited to have been caused by them are only the incumbents that do not move with the market or times.

It's like a necker cube.

Glance at it and she looks like a renter or typical youth of a city with tourism but poor purchasing power/ social mobility, but stare a bit longer and relax your focus and she becomes an incumbent who doesn't move with the market or times

Re: Sam Altman Says OpenAI Will Leave the EU If There's Any Real AI Regulation

#125
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the AI regulations are reasonable and AI companies can't operate, the technology just isn't ready for wide-spread adoption yet. Conversely if the AI system is reasonable, but the regulations are making them illegal, then the blame is on the regulations. There is a trade-off between potential benefits and potential harm, and it's not immediately clear to me, who is in the better position to find it: the AI compan…

The regulation is meant to protect the EU citizens which couldn't care less about the financial incentives of a US company or their hype du jour. If hypothetically no AI can be created with respecting the citizens, what should the choice be, block or accept Skynet? (I said "hypothetically")

I am curious, do you think SkyNet, if it's really "SkyNet", can be blocked within the confines of the country in which it appears first?

And if it's not SkyNet but just an awesome tool like ChatGPT is today, do you think regulators will manage to take into consideration the advantages lost making this tool illegal while protecting us from a potential SkyNet?

Re: Sam Altman Says OpenAI Will Leave the EU If There's Any Real AI Regulation

#126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you be more specific, with examples? Who did what?

Asbestos. Phthalates. Fen-phen. Chloroflorocarbons. Leaded gasoline. All were legal because no harm had been shown... yet.

"Modern crop of CEOs"

All of those examples are primarily damage done pre 80s

Re: Sam Altman Says OpenAI Will Leave the EU If There's Any Real AI Regulation

#127
post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Asbestos. Phthalates. Fen-phen. Chloroflorocarbons. Leaded gasoline. All were legal because no harm had been shown... yet.

"Modern crop of CEOs" All of those examples are primarily damage done pre 80s

Phthalates? Aren't those currently an issue, right now, in water? Aren't they currently being used in plastic? Or did I get the name wrong?

Re: Sam Altman Says OpenAI Will Leave the EU If There's Any Real AI Regulation

#128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you be more specific, with examples? Who did what?

User privacy, cambridge analytica, facebook, and the impact those together had in several elections, most especially Trump 2016 and Brexit.

Cambridge Analytica had basically no effect on any election. People who actually understand online advertising consider it a joke.

The "organic" social stuff that helped Trump 2016 (leaked Democrat emails, etc) had nothing to do with privacy or ads.

Re: Sam Altman Says OpenAI Will Leave the EU If There's Any Real AI Regulation

#129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Suppose a new generation of AIs results in a big economy boost. Then a country might be put in a position to choose between some risks to privacy etc and a risk of being left behind. A similar situation would be a country that in 1900 decides whether or not to outlaw cars.

Nobody outlawed cars.

There were preciously little regulations in the 1900s though. Don't you think if cars were invented today they would face a whole lot of regulations?

Re: Sam Altman Says OpenAI Will Leave the EU If There's Any Real AI Regulation

#130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you be more specific, with examples? Who did what?

Asbestos. Phthalates. Fen-phen. Chloroflorocarbons. Leaded gasoline. All were legal because no harm had been shown... yet.

Was the potential harm well known and accepted before showing it existed? How?!
Post reply on HN