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

401–410 of 424 posts

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

#401

Post by infecto »

dijksterhuis wrote: post #38
infecto wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And its kind of funny when non-legal experts attempt to say something is fine or not. It depends highly on not only how its written but the spirit of what the EU is attempting to do. The knee jerk reaction is probably that historically institutions do a terrible job of writing rules and especially rules around new technology.

you are right to call me out. IANAL. on me.

And not entirely trying to call you out but the devil is in the details. I don't necessarily disagree with the ideas but implementations often fall short and you end up with lots of litigation in court to figure out the spirit of the rule. My main complain here is that how much of the focus is on AI implementations? What is AI? Should the rules not be crafted more on the protection of certain classes and ideas and not on the implementation of AI?

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

#402

Post by guappa »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #342
verzali wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will be honest, I am always very skeptical of these claims that the big tech companies are fine but small business is hurting. Many of them seem to originate with the big tech companies themselves and I highly doubt they really have the interests of small business in mind. Plus, I'm old enough to remember when everyone claimed EU tech law was about to ban memes, which didn't happen...

We saw a bunch of small side project type of sites from the EU close down all over HN after GDPR became a thing. The risk for someone small is too high. The minimum fines are in the millions.

[citazione necessaria]

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

#403

Post by Nasrudith »

watwut wrote: post #187
scarface_74 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn’t matter what it requires, the point is as usual, the EU doesn’t take into account the unintended consequences of laws it passes when it comes to technology. That partially explains the state of the tech industry in the EU. But guess which had a more deleterious effect on Facebook ad revenue and tracking - Apples ATT or the GDPR?

I love hearing pointificarions about unintended consequences from Americans and especially from Americans in tech. No, being free to abuse others is not a positive feature. Not for tech, not for politics, not for business.

[flagged]

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

#404

Post by Nasrudith »

justonceokay wrote: post #349
mgdev wrote: post #343

The EU once again races toward premature regulation. Europe's tech sector will continue to wither as America and others surge ahead. You can't regulate your way to technological leadership.

I think in the medium-term future we will have our own real-life Butlerian Jihad against thinking machines. Maybe they won’t be outright banned, but there needs to be some conservative force that pushes back against progress for the sake of “because we can”. Is this legislation premature? Maybe. But I don’t think it will be the last or the the most comprehensive within our lifetimes.

Why the fuck do people cite the Butlerian jihad as a good thing instead of what it is: stupidity writ large? "There must always be a lich king" logic in play. No, there really fucking doesn't.

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

#405

Post by cmenge »

naabb wrote: post #363
cmenge wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Good, that's the point. Price out the products that are bad for the environment. They are still there if you want to contribute to the degradation of the environment

"Bad for the environment" is relative.

The problem here is that they tell you: - We're building renewables which deliver super clean and cheap energy - CO2 is the root of all evil

Then, they force you to use an LED which uses less energy (which is clean and cheap, no?) but contains a lot more chemicals and rare earths, so in a number of ways seems less "environmentally friendly". This seems contradictory and half-assed.

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

#406

Post by cmenge »

jillyboel wrote: post #374
cmenge wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I wasn't aware of that, interesting, thanks.

Light temperature is one thing, but the spectrum is very different (which is essentially how it saves energy, almost all radiation emitted is a narrow band of visible light whereas an incandescent lamp produces a blackbody spectrum with a lot of radiation emitted in the infrared).

Also I notice a lot of color banding (not sure if that's the right term) with many cheap LEDs. I observe the same or at least a very similar phenomenon when watching DLP cinema projections.

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

#407

Post by cmenge »

martin_a wrote: post #314
cmenge wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So in essence, it disallows logging IP address for any purpose, be it security, debugging, rate-limiting etc. because you can't give consent in advance for this, and no other sentence in Art. 6.1 applies. Moreover, to reason about this, one also needs to take into account Art 6.2 which means there might be an additional 27 laws you need to find and understand. Note, however, that recital 30 which you quoted is explic…

That's not true. IP addresses might be processed in regards to article 6.1 c) or 6.1 f) but only for these very narrowly defined use cases and in accordance with article 5. So, purge your logs after 14/30 days and don't use the ip address for anything else and you will be fine.

Where do the 14/30 days come from?

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

#408

Post by cmenge »

troupo wrote: post #313
cmenge wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So in essence, it disallows logging IP address for any purpose, be it security, debugging, rate-limiting etc. because you can't give consent in advance for this, and no other sentence in Art. 6.1 applies. Moreover, to reason about this, one also needs to take into account Art 6.2 which means there might be an additional 27 laws you need to find and understand. Note, however, that recital 30 which you quoted is explic…

> So in essence, it disallows logging IP address for any purpose, be it security, debugging, rate-limiting etc. because you can't give consent in advance for this, and no other sentence in Art. 6.1 applies. No, it doesn't. Subsections b, c, and f roughly cover this. On top of that, no one is going to come at you with fines for doing regular business things as long as you don't store this data indefinitely long, sell…

"Roughly", "regular business things" etc.

Sounds vague to me, which was the original point.

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

#409

Post by cmenge »

cccbbbaaa wrote: post #332
cmenge wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So in essence, it disallows logging IP address for any purpose, be it security, debugging, rate-limiting etc. because you can't give consent in advance for this, and no other sentence in Art. 6.1 applies. Moreover, to reason about this, one also needs to take into account Art 6.2 which means there might be an additional 27 laws you need to find and understand. Note, however, that recital 30 which you quoted is explic…

> So in essence, it disallows logging IP address for any purpose, be it security, debugging, rate-limiting etc. because you can't give consent in advance for this, and no other sentence in Art. 6.1 applies. In addition to the other answers, I want to point out that recital 49 says that it is possible under legitimate interest (6(1)f).

Thank you! This is the only non-vague answer, as it directly addresses the use-case.

If only I had known this in my last corporate role where this discussion alone cost us weeks :/

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

#410

Post by justonceokay »

kvgr wrote: post #352
justonceokay wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think in the medium-term future we will have our own real-life Butlerian Jihad against thinking machines. Maybe they won’t be outright banned, but there needs to be some conservative force that pushes back against progress for the sake of “because we can”. Is this legislation premature? Maybe. But I don’t think it will be the last or the the most comprehensive within our lifetimes.

And China will have none of that and will remove us from the face of earth.

Why would they do that? Are we trying to remove Chinese people from earth and they might retaliate?
Post reply on HN