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

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

gizmodo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 210 posts

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

#131

Post by teekert »

toth wrote: post #105
newshorts wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real take away is that he’s out front shaping regulation before it impacts him. In the US he knows it’s easy to manipulate our policy with a little song and dance because our policy makers don’t understand what they are looking at. It’s a different story in the EU where you have competent leaders. That seems to be the reason for the inverse approach. US: “let me help you write the regulations ;)” EU: “you’re gonn…

As a EU citizen, I really wish we had competent leaders, particularly in Brussels. Have never seen any evidence that is the case, specially with regards to tech. The last EU initiative at sweeping regulation in the tech space (GDPR) was disastrous. It imposed huge compliance costs for all entities, from large multinationals to small startups and business and even some individuals and nonprofits. For the multinational…

I agree, there are some stupid bureaucratic loop holes, i.e., Find a public data set without consents which you want to use. This is not allowed, but this is what you can do:

* Try to contact owner of data to ask for consent of all people (maybe thousands)

* They ignore you because it's an insane task to arrange all those consents...but...

* Now you have shown that you did a reasonable effort to obtain consent and...

* Now you can use the data for research purposes.

You can't use it for making/creating anything related to IP though. But you can get creative of course.

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

#133

Post by BoxOfRain »

jevgeni wrote: post #118
eterevsky wrote: post #97

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.

In the UK we did mandate that a pedestrian must walk in front of the car with a red flag to warn of the approaching vehicle though for a while!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_flag_traffic_laws#Red_flag...

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

#134

Post by southernplaces7 »

So to be sure of the basics: Altman goes before the U.S. congress to promote AI regulation, and than at the same time makes arguments that imply not wanting regulation for the EU market? Cute little double standard...

Not in the least related to him selectively changing postures because he worries about a real threat of upstart competitors forming in the highly dynamic U.S. market, while also worrying about a loss of manipulable customers in the much more passive and non-competitive EU market.. Couldn't be something like that.

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

#135

Post by detaro »

southernplaces7 wrote: post #134

So to be sure of the basics: Altman goes before the U.S. congress to promote AI regulation, and than at the same time makes arguments that imply not wanting regulation for the EU market? Cute little double standard... Not in the least related to him selectively changing postures because he worries about a real threat of upstart competitors forming in the highly dynamic U.S. market, while also worrying about a loss of…

Probably also because he doesn't expect any strong regulation to come from congress regardless of how much he talks about it.

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

#136

Post by nickpp »

epolanski wrote: post #104
bionhoward wrote: post #60

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.

What was the actual, documented, damage on the "user privacy" issue though? The only effect I know is targeted ads which seems like a net benefit to me.

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

#137

Post by xiphias2 »

ttlsa wrote: post #108
xiphias2 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an EU citizen I think it's about joining SkyNet or falling behind in productivity. I prefer joining SkyNet.

If, hypothetically, a SkyNet like AI actually existed, how much damage to humanity would you be ok with as long as productivity and quality of life went up went up for those who were spared? Let's assume that you and your loved ones are among those who have been guaranteed safety by this AI. I am sorry if the tone comes across as snarky. Not my intention. Genuinely curious.

My comment was about if it's starting to exist, EU regulatation won't stop its power and influence.

If everyone uses ChatSkyNet for programming (or even ChatGPT-4), but EU is not allowed, EU will simply lose its competitiveness in creating products.

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

#138

Post by Tangurena2 »

jamincan wrote: post #84
themitigating wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it's subjective right? The balance. Since a company is usually harmed by increased regulation their opinion is biased. But there's no oppposite to this. Governments don't benefit if companies leave and in fact they lose out. This also includes the population (jobs etc) that means the opinion of the government isn't biased.

> Since a company is usually harmed by increased regulation their opinion is biased. I know this is the prevailing point of view in business, but is it actually true? How many bank failures would have been avoided if US banking regulations hadn't been slackened so much?

> How many bank failures would have been avoided if US banking regulations hadn't been slackened so much?

Most of the failures after 2000 would have been prevented. All of the 2008 financial crisis was caused by removing regulation.

Prior to Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 [0], several states ruled that credit default swaps were insurance and thus regulated CDS as insurance. Some states ruled that CDS were gambling and regulated it as gambling. The CFMA basically said "credit default swaps are now a federal issue and it will be regulated at the federal level" and set up a poorly funded agency that had no teeth until after the bailouts in 2008.

During the 1920s, many banks got involved in both commercial banking (taking deposits and making loans) as well as investment banking (arranging IPOs). In 1933, the Glass-Steagal Act [1] said that banks may do one or the other, but cannot do both. In 1999, Glass-Steagal was later repealed by GLBA [2] as CitiCorp was doing both (due to mergers) while daring the regulators to do anything about it.

0 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_Futures_Modernizatio...

1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1933_Banking_Act

2 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm%E2%80%93Leach%E2%80%93Bl...

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

#139

Post by Tangurena2 »

chii wrote: post #20
jeroenhd wrote: post #5

> If we can comply, we will, and if we can’t, we’ll cease operating… We will try. But there are technical limits to what’s possible. Isn't that what any normal company does? Comply until it's impossible to operate legally? They can choose between ceasing to operate or getting arrested. If the AI regulations are reasonable and AI companies can't operate, the technology just isn't ready for wide-spread adoption yet. Se…

By proclaiming they'd leave if they can't comply, it might cause the EU regulators to "self-censor" the regulation such that it's "easy to comply". but tbh, i dont see what the regulations would be. I am a fan of no regulation unless actual harm has been shown first.

As quoted in the article:

> He called for some regulation “between the traditional European approach and the traditional U.S. approach,” whatever that means.

And you phrase it:

> I am a fan of no regulation unless actual harm has been shown first.

This is the "traditional US approach". As has been shown far too often, by the time actual harm has been shown, it is far too late. Especially as large industries like to use their economic clout to pervert things with propaganda like "oh, the science isn't settled yet".

The "traditional US approach" is why cigarettes were sold for 100 years after they had been shown to cause cancer along with other major medical issues. And why cigarettes are still sold.

And another HN story from today discusses this exact issue: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36067401

The European approach is "show us that it is safe before you put this stuff on the market". They use the 'Precautionary Principle'.

> The precautionary principle is the idea that when there is the chance of negative consequences from an industrial practice, that the burden of proof lies with the inventors/implementers of the process to prove that there are no negative (ecological and environmental) consequences of it. The principle is often cited by "technological conservatives" and/or environmental activists when there is a perceived lack of evidence showing that a technology is absolutely safe.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Precautionary_principle

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_principle

Is AI "safe enough" to be sold/marketed to people? Many people say it isn't. The people who tend to get into executive positions at companies have a visible lack of concern about anything other than their personal wealth. So while AI might be "safe enough", the people who tend to get to the top will make even the safest things unsafe.

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

#140

Post by Tangurena2 »

themitigating wrote: post #76
ChrisLTD wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a normal negotiation tactic on the part of OpenAI. Businesses often say they will leave a jurisdiction or be forced to shut down if X regulation is put in place.

It's a tactic of all businesses. In the US they play states against each other to get higher and higher tax breaks for moving.

The name for it is Boulwarism [0]. It is a "take it or leave it" attitude. You see it every day when presented with an "I agree" checkbox/button.

0 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boulwarism

Post reply on HN