41–50 of 79 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Too much regulation completely crippled the supersonic commercial flight industry.
So most people not wanting to hear sonic booms to benefit a small group of high wealth fliers is bad?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If your sole business model depends on having no regulation then your business model is wrong and predatory. Regulation doesn't hinder innovation, it's just that CEOs want that quick buck instead of being responsible and using regulation for their advantage.
This is a bad counterpoint to "more regulation makes business harder". No regulation at all is probably the hardest business environment possible, but too much regulation is bad too.
nor there is regulation to inform a user something uses AI or the dangers of being dependent on this magical oracle.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would however blame them if they wrote an ordinance that was widely misunderstood to mean that someone had to knock on my door each day to make sure I knew the local chemical factory had a fire alarm.
If the chemical factory sets themselves on fire every day to set off the fire alarm to annoy me to pressure me into removing the fire alarm law, I still blame them.
> EU rules on AI models become enforceable. What's going to change? I can answer that. A higher regulatory overhead that means less money for R&D and decreased profit margins for companies here in the EU. That's what's going to happen.
If your sole business model depends on having no regulation then your business model is wrong and predatory. Regulation doesn't hinder innovation, it's just that CEOs want that quick buck instead of being responsible and using regulation for their advantage.
General statement that means zilch. Regulation depending on particular conditions can definitely curtail innovation or destroy it completely. Bureaucracy wants to regulate everything including how often we fart.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would however blame them if they wrote an ordinance that was widely misunderstood to mean that someone had to knock on my door each day to make sure I knew the local chemical factory had a fire alarm.
> widely misunderstood Moments ago it was "misunderstandings or malicious compliance". Did you misplace one on your apologetic quest? I'm really trying not to assume the worst about you. Is there any reason you insist so much on giving the benefit of the doubt to every law breaker out there? Especially when we're sometimes talking about very deep pockets who can afford lawyers?
Well, you are. Maybe don't do that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Popups have nothing to do with GDPR. They are reaction to Privacy and Electronic Communications Directive which predates GDPR. And yes, it is deliberate misinformation.
Cookie popups pre-date GRPR, but find it hard to believe the uptick in popups that happened around May 2018 was in response to legislation from 2003.
Some time after IE6 and Firefox and before Chrome, the default policy switched from "prompt" to "accept".
GDPR was an attempt to restore that default behavior, however no browser did so. I'd've guessed Mozilla could be convinced to revert, but Google presumably paid them enough to look the other way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So most people not wanting to hear sonic booms to benefit a small group of high wealth fliers is bad?
Perhaps if the industry had been allowed to develop, we'd have some freaky ass new and innovative tech that would've abated the problem. The world may never know!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If your sole business model depends on having no regulation then your business model is wrong and predatory. Regulation doesn't hinder innovation, it's just that CEOs want that quick buck instead of being responsible and using regulation for their advantage.
>"Regulation doesn't hinder innovation" General statement that means zilch. Regulation depending on particular conditions can definitely curtail innovation or destroy it completely. Bureaucracy wants to regulate everything including how often we fart.
quality regulations don't curtail innovation.
I repeat, if your business model (which like the big majority of the entrepreneurial world is based on) is against regulation, it's wrong.
I don't think it's acceptable to have a billionaire tech bro dictating everything I do in my life while he gets rich by selling my data. One of the reasons regulation exists is to protect customers.
It's about damn time the business world moved away from the capitalism mindset that you NEED to explore the consumer to be successful. We have a lot of examples in Europe where if the company is even a bit less shitty and is sympathetic to the customer, it increases trust and brings in more revenue because your customers trust it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a bad counterpoint to "more regulation makes business harder". No regulation at all is probably the hardest business environment possible, but too much regulation is bad too.
There is no AI regulation in the US and look at where we are, everyone depends on it, SOTA models are doing CSAM and porn deepfakes, and there's no regulation in the US to prevent this from happening nor there is regulation to inform a user something uses AI or the dangers of being dependent on this magical oracle.
Well, there's the White House blocking models on a whim. I guess that's the closest they'll get to something resembling regulation.
> EU rules on AI models become enforceable. What's going to change? I can answer that. A higher regulatory overhead that means less money for R&D and decreased profit margins for companies here in the EU. That's what's going to happen.