EU has become a true dystopia.
It's great Americans criticize the EU. I just wish they did more than (paraphrasing) "EU sucks, lol." Wouldn't hurt being a bit more constructive.
AI systems with 'unacceptable risk' are now banned in the EU
201–210 of 424 posts
Re: AI systems with 'unacceptable risk' are now banned in the EU
#202Some of the unacceptable activities include:
AI used for social scoring (e.g., building risk profiles based on a person’s behavior) - Oh, so insurance, and credit score is banned now? And background checks.
AI that manipulates a person’s decisions subliminally or deceptively. - Oh, so no more ads?
AI that exploits vulnerabilities like age, disability, or socioeconomic status. - Oh, are we banning facebook now?
AI that attempts to predict people committing crimes based on their appearance. - pretty sure that exists somewhere too.
AI that uses biometrics to infer a person’s characteristics, like their sexual orientation. - oh, my, tiktok does not even needs biometrics, just a couple of swipes. Google actually too, just where you visit.
AI that collects “real time” biometric data in public places for the purposes of law enforcement. - but cameras everywhere are ok.
AI that tries to infer people’s emotions at work or school. - like every social network, right? or a company with toxic marketing, but without ai (hello, apple with green bubbles)
AI that creates — or expands — facial recognition databases by scraping images online or from security cameras. - oh, this also probably exists. So companies could track clients.Re: AI systems with 'unacceptable risk' are now banned in the EU
#203Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the act: > to assess or predict the risk of a natural person committing a criminal offence, based solely on the profiling of a natural person or on assessing their personality traits and characteristics ; more details in recital 42: https://artificialintelligenceact.eu/recital/42/
In all fairness, that would still ban a system that understands my front door being approached by a guy in a postal uniform wearing a parcel is likely unproblematic, while a guy wearing a hoodie and a crowbar is likely to commit a crime.
Not really. Such a system would be evaluating the whole context and not solely profiling the person. What the person is doing (delivering parcel vs cutting a chain link fence) is not a part of their personality or profile. How much danger they’re posing in the moment also isn’t, and so on.
Arguably, an AI security system with great objective understanding of the unfolding circumstances would be a lot better than one profiling people passing by and raising an alarm each time a person that looks a certain way walks by.
It’s just that simple CV-based classification, perhaps trained with unsupervised learning, is easier in AI than observing a chain of actions. The labelled data set is usually accessible from police orgs if you want to simply train an AI to look at people and judge them based on visual traits. By the EU saying “this easy way is not good enough”, it is encouraging technological development in a way. Develop a system that’s more objective than visual profiling, and the market is yours.
Re: AI systems with 'unacceptable risk' are now banned in the EU
#204I am not expert but there seems to be an overlap in the article between 'AI' and well ... just software, or signal processing: - AI that collects “real time” biometric data in public places for the purposes of law enforcement. - AI that creates — or expands — facial recognition databases by scraping images online or from security cameras. - AI that uses biometrics to infer a person’s characteristics - AI that collect…
Deliniating "AI" from other software is one of the tricky parts of the act and ultimately left as an excercise to the courts.
Trying to define it for scope was IMHO a mistake.
Re: AI systems with 'unacceptable risk' are now banned in the EU
#205Earlier quoted context omitted.
The usage covering "unacceptable risk" is stuff that's either illegal or heavily regulated already in human operation too. > Also, this kind of laws would make Europeans to stay at the loser side of the AI competition as China and mostly every US corporation doesn't care about that. Not sure that's a game I want to win.
And do you think a law will prevent that? The law will only ensure good companies like MistralAI or Black Forest Labs will stay in the shadow. This is same idiocy like the Republican senator who wants to prohibit Deepseek usage in US. About legality, what's the illegal thing AI shouldn't do? Many of that knowledge can be accessible already from books, even how to build weapons or explosives
It will at least greatly hinder LE's capability to do massive minority report type dragnets, targetted violence incitement campaigns, or grading workers or schoolchildren based on their facial expressions etc extremely nasty stuff.
The banned use cases are very specific and concerns systems explicitly designed for such dystopian shit. AI giving advice how to build weapons or explosives is not banned here. The "unacceptable risk" category does not concern companies like MistralAI or Black Forest Labs. This is not the same idiocy.
Re: AI systems with 'unacceptable risk' are now banned in the EU
#206I am not expert but there seems to be an overlap in the article between 'AI' and well ... just software, or signal processing: - AI that collects “real time” biometric data in public places for the purposes of law enforcement. - AI that creates — or expands — facial recognition databases by scraping images online or from security cameras. - AI that uses biometrics to infer a person’s characteristics - AI that collect…
[deleted]
Re: AI systems with 'unacceptable risk' are now banned in the EU
#207Some of the unacceptable activities include: AI used for social scoring (e.g., building risk profiles based on a person’s behavior) - Oh, so insurance, and credit score is banned now? And background checks. AI that manipulates a person’s decisions subliminally or deceptively. - Oh, so no more ads? AI that exploits vulnerabilities like age, disability, or socioeconomic status. - Oh, are we banning facebook now? AI tha…
I fail to see where you stand based on your line by line commentary. Are we not supposed to be against these obvious negatives? Regulation against undesired outcomes needs to start somewhere. Do you believe we should not regulate, simply because we already do some of the things that seem to fall under these individual buckets?
Re: AI systems with 'unacceptable risk' are now banned in the EU
#208Re: AI systems with 'unacceptable risk' are now banned in the EU
#209Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yet better privacy protections than we in the States enjoy.
The EU in a nutshell: You can't have nice things, but on the bright side Google/Apple/Facebook won't know what you had for dinner. Now give us your whole financial transaction and travel history, so we can share it with the US, a hostile country, citizen!
Can we get some sources that back the narrative for that last sentence?
Re: AI systems with 'unacceptable risk' are now banned in the EU
#210Earlier quoted context omitted.
That take doesn't at all engage with the main point of the article: Unacceptable risk.
it doesn't actually define unacceptable risks. could be used for the development of biological, chemical, or nuclear agents? sure, an intelligent general-purpose model could be. so can wikipedia versus having to trawl through old library books. so can control-F on a PDF.
It provides examples of unacceptable risks — they're in the article.
And the obvious whataboutism is obvious. Yes, you can find other sources for information on, say, developing bio weapons elsewhere. Does that mean you should have systems that aid you in collecting, synthesizing and displaying that information? That with the right interfaces and actuators can actually help you move towards that goal?
There's a line somewhere, that is very hard to draw, and yet should be drawn regardless.