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

AI systems with 'unacceptable risk' are now banned in the EU

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 424 posts

Re: AI systems with 'unacceptable risk' are now banned in the EU

#371

Post by DocTomoe »

fredoliveira wrote: post #265
DocTomoe wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For starters, I am still waiting for Apple Intelligence to arrive on my phone. Reason given is "EU legislative concerns". Then there's the nontrivial number of especially local US news sources which now give me a cheerful "451 Unavailable For Legal Reasons" error code. Then there's the outright stupid stuff - like lightbulbs that do not cost 15 euros a piece (to save 'energy'), or drinking straws that do not dissolve…

> For starters, I am still waiting for Apple Intelligence to arrive on my phone. Reason given is "EU legislative concerns". So the EU should not control where your data is processed? You can't claim in one comment to be bummed about data exchanges between the EU and the US (which you do), and then not understand why there are regulations in place that are slowing down the roll-out of things like Apple Intelligence, f…

There is a qualitative difference between

1. I am giving my data freely and because of my own decision to an organization I trust and

2. The state is taking my data by force of law to share it with an inherently untrustworthy organization.

Re: AI systems with 'unacceptable risk' are now banned in the EU

#372

Post by xvokcarts »

tzs wrote: post #309
Muromec wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the thinking machine rejects my mortgage application, it should be possible to point out which exact rule triggered the rejection. With rules explicitly set by an operator it's possible. It's also possible to say that the rules in place comply with the law and stay compliant during the operation, for example it doesn't unintentionally guess that I'm having another citizenship based on my surname or postal code.

If the mortgage application evaluation system is deterministic so that the same input always produces the same output then it is easy to answer "Why was my application rejected?". Just rerun the application with higher income until you get a pass. Then tell the person their application was rejected because income was not at least whatever that passing income amount was. Maybe also vary some other inputs to see if it…

> If the mortgage application evaluation system is deterministic so that the same input always produces the same output then it is easy to answer "Why was my application rejected?".

But banks, at least in my country (central EU), don't have to explain their reasons for rejecting a mortgage application. So why would their automated systems have to?

Re: AI systems with 'unacceptable risk' are now banned in the EU

#373

Post by DocTomoe »

fredoliveira wrote: post #264
DocTomoe wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EU bending backwards to meet US demands to access non-US-related traveller records: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/summary/eu-us-agr... Yes, it only affects airlines that have connections to the US. But if I book Lufthansa from Frankfurt to Tokyo, the PNR will still be sent to the US, for Lufthansa has connections to the US. Yes, there are 'safeguards' in there, to shackle the DHS to be responsible with t…

> Yes, it only affects airlines that have connections to the US. But if I book Lufthansa from Frankfurt to Tokyo, the PNR will still be sent to the US, for Lufthansa has connections to the US. Any proof of that claim? The agreement specifically mentions flights between the EU and the US, so any departure from that (like the scenario you describe) is unlawful, according to my own understanding.

Where do you read this only affects flights between the EU and the US?

Article 2.1 clearly states it is applicable to all EU airlines *operating* flights to or from the US. That does not mean they ONLY have to provide PNR FOR those flights

Article 3 speaks about "Data in their (the airlines) reservation systems". There's no limitation to only US-related flights.

The specific mention of flights to and from the US you are likely refer to is in the preamble, referencing a law the US set up prior.

Re: AI systems with 'unacceptable risk' are now banned in the EU

#374

Post by jillyboel »

cmenge wrote: post #311
robin_reala wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you talking about? Leaving aside your other random complaints that I don’t recognise, but can’t immediately link to, a basic lightbulb is less than €3 for a two-pack: https://www.ikea.com/de/en/p/solhetta-led-bulb-e14-250-lumen...

That's an LED though. I understood he was referring to incandescent light bulbs, which have been largely regulated out of the market. So you now need to get an "Edison light bulb" which circumvenes regulation but costs significantly more.

I'm confused. The US also banned incandescent lamps?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase-out_of_incandescent_ligh...

> A ban covering most general service incandescent lamps took effect in the United States in 2023

So you can't even buy them in the US anymore, either. And cheap LEDs are available everywhere, with many color temperatures to choose from.

Re: AI systems with 'unacceptable risk' are now banned in the EU

#375

Post by bArray »

> Under the bloc’s approach, there are four broad risk levels: (1) Minimal risk (e.g., email spam filters) will face no regulatory oversight; (2) limited risk, which includes customer service chatbots, will have a light-touch regulatory oversight; (3) high risk — AI for healthcare recommendations is one example — will face heavy regulatory oversight; and (4) unacceptable risk applications — the focus of this month’s compliance requirements — will be prohibited entirely.

I think this is a massive oversight, for a few reasons:

1. Things will continue to be done, just elsewhere. The EU could find itself scrambling to catch-up (again) because of their own regulation.

2. Increased oversight is only part of the picture, the real challenge is that even with the oversight, proving that AI is acceptably safe, or that the risk is acceptable.

3. Some things are inherently not safe, e.g. war. I know many (almost all) military tech companies using AI, and the EU is about to become an impossible investment zone for these guys.

I think this will make investment into the EU tough, given tonnes of investment is now focused around AI. AI is and will likely remain the fuel to economic growth for quite some time, and the EU adding a time/money tax to the fuel.

Re: AI systems with 'unacceptable risk' are now banned in the EU

#376

Post by throwaway8438 »

scarface_74 wrote: post #339
troupo wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Facebook doesn’t sell your data. A distinction without meaning. Here's your original statement: "no other place thinks that their citizens are too dumb to make informed choices." Questions: At which point do you make informed choice about the data that Facebook collects on you? At which point do you make informed choice about Facebook tracking you across the internet, even on websites that do not belong to Facebook…

> At which point do you make informed choice about the data that Facebook collects on you? You make an “informed choice” when you create a Facebook account, give Facebook your name, date of birth, your relationship status and who you are in a relationship with, your sexual orientation, when you check in to where you have been, when you click on and buy from advertisers, when you join a Facebook group, when you tell i…

The existence of Meta's shadow profiles [0] means there is no "informed choice" to be made. They will track you with or without your consent.

[0] https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/11/17225482/facebook-shadow-...

Re: AI systems with 'unacceptable risk' are now banned in the EU

#377

Post by mh- »

jorisboris wrote: post #230
dmix wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this just based on hypothetical scenario they sat in a room coming up with or has such a thing been tried and harmed people?

I once tried building a Macbook app which lowers my music volume when I'm not smiling, to try to stimulate more happy emotions (forcing yourself to smile induces happy feelings) Then I started thinking how this could be used in restaurants to see if waiters smile to the people they are serving Or in customer service (you can actually hear it when people smile on the phone) Then I realised that this kind of tech would…

This is an interesting idea (the first one..) and I suspect it'd be quite easy to build now. Someone posted a web app recently that reminds you to blink (iff you don't), and it was incredibly accurate for me, running fully in the browser.

Re: AI systems with 'unacceptable risk' are now banned in the EU

#378

Post by thrance »

NekkoDroid wrote: post #370
thrance wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right after Musk bought twitter, the code for the algorithm was open sourced and I took a look at it. I don't know if it's still open today but anyways, there was some ML stuff in it at the time. I guess it would depend on what constitutes "AI" to European legislators.

> I don't know if it's still open today but anyways I am p sure that they made like major major changes after they code dumped it. Considering "verified boosts" and "elon boosts" are very noticable, with the first being an confirmed "feature", I doubt the algorithm would even remotely work with data from nowadays. Anyway, what I wanna say is that the last commit was over 2 years ago.

Yes, the AI behind X's "algorithm" has been heavily skewed towards favoring far right content. That much is obvious to anyone taking a look at the X front page. This should give some more grounds to a continent-wide ban on this platform, threatening our democracies with relentless propaganda.

Re: AI systems with 'unacceptable risk' are now banned in the EU

#379

Post by scarface_74 »

throwaway8438 wrote: post #376
scarface_74 wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At which point do you make informed choice about the data that Facebook collects on you? You make an “informed choice” when you create a Facebook account, give Facebook your name, date of birth, your relationship status and who you are in a relationship with, your sexual orientation, when you check in to where you have been, when you click on and buy from advertisers, when you join a Facebook group, when you tell i…

The existence of Meta's shadow profiles [0] means there is no "informed choice" to be made. They will track you with or without your consent. [0] https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/11/17225482/facebook-shadow-...

You did see my link where Facebook stopped doing that in 2018? You notice you can’t find any newer references.

Re: AI systems with 'unacceptable risk' are now banned in the EU

#380

Post by [deleted] »

mavhc wrote: post #328
tw04 wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The problem is that the GDPR has been largely a failure protecting citizens from corporations, but it has hurt everyone else. This is just laughably incorrect. Literally every Fortune 500 that I work with who has operations in Europe has an entire team that owns GDPR compliance. It is one of the most successful projects to curtail businesses treating private data like poker chips since HIPAA.

Is their job to reduce private data to the minimum needed, or the maximum allowed?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN