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

The EU has begun enforcing the AI Act: first RFIs to model providers

tokenstead.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 109 posts

Re: The EU has begun enforcing the AI Act: first RFIs to model providers

#81

Post by cbg0 »

lurk2 wrote: post #68
consensus1 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you ever expect that you would have a choice of what products you use at work? You are being paid to work there. And yes, if you feel that strongly, you absolutely do have the option to vote with your feet at any time.

> Why would you ever expect that you would have a choice of what products you use at work? Similar arguments were made to defend Harvey Weinstein. > And yes, if you feel that strongly, you absolutely do have the option to vote with your feet at any time. People shouldn’t have to switch jobs because they don’t want to provide Bill Gates with their phone number.

> Similar arguments were made to defend Harvey Weinstein.

We're now comparing a SaaS product versus people you work with? I don't think ChatGPT will ever physically assault you.

> People shouldn’t have to switch jobs because they don’t want to provide Bill Gates with their phone number.

This is why the EU has very strong employee protection laws; in most countries here there are government agencies that will help you, you're not at the mercy of the HR department.

Re: The EU has begun enforcing the AI Act: first RFIs to model providers

#82

Post by jopsen »

thesumofall wrote: post #78

One can and must discuss and challenge all these regulations, but this seems better than just sliding carelessly into some sort of mega-corp dystopia. It is good to have some balance of power. Is the EU perfect? Absolutely not, but neither are the corporates. Ideally, compromises will be found (and mostly they are found). Honestly, what’s the worst that can happen here? If this slows down the European economy, that’s…

> Honestly, what’s the worst that can happen here?

Regulation that cannot practically be implemented or complied with (example: forks of open models), this leads to selective enforcement and by extension corruption and loss of rule of law.

Regulation before the market has even settled down, we don't know if AI will be datacenter only, or open models everybody forks, modifies and runs locally.

And we won't know for a couple for years to come.

Re: The EU has begun enforcing the AI Act: first RFIs to model providers

#83

Post by thesumofall »

jopsen wrote: post #82
thesumofall wrote: post #78

One can and must discuss and challenge all these regulations, but this seems better than just sliding carelessly into some sort of mega-corp dystopia. It is good to have some balance of power. Is the EU perfect? Absolutely not, but neither are the corporates. Ideally, compromises will be found (and mostly they are found). Honestly, what’s the worst that can happen here? If this slows down the European economy, that’s…

> Honestly, what’s the worst that can happen here? Regulation that cannot practically be implemented or complied with (example: forks of open models), this leads to selective enforcement and by extension corruption and loss of rule of law. Regulation before the market has even settled down, we don't know if AI will be datacenter only, or open models everybody forks, modifies and runs locally. And we won't know for a…

Absolutely fair points!

> Regulation before the market has even settled down

The counter point would be: the major AI providers have seemingly also lost control of their creation. So at the very least both sides are doing things before they fully understand what they are doing. Also, looking at the (planned) IPOs and the share of AI in S&P 500, one could argue that while the market hasn’t settled, it already is a massive market. When should we start regulating? Eventually it will be too late

> Regulation that cannot practically be implemented or complied with

Yes. Having worked with one EU authority, it’s still people who eventually do the enforcing. That has the risk of corruption but I have also seen repeatedly that they won’t do something if it violates common sense. As always, there is room for interpretation and enforcement and it will be used. Like with any good governance. And companies still can (and do!) sue

Re: The EU has begun enforcing the AI Act: first RFIs to model providers

#84

Post by aenis »

Hamuko wrote: post #79
aenis wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By people who never built anything except bureaucracies?

We should instead be governed by people who never built anything except giant repositories of stolen data?

No, but there is quite a bit of spectrum between 'never built anything' and 'only built things unethically'. I'd prefer to be governed by people who built something in their lives, and are not career bureaucrats.

Re: The EU has begun enforcing the AI Act: first RFIs to model providers

#85

Post by Gerard22Aug »

Gerard22Aug wrote: post #4
asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #2

I doubt it’s the end of AI access in Europe. Even if they do fine them 3% of global turnover, that’s probably a small enough fraction of their European revenue that it’s worth the risk. After all if they drop European traffic it’s not like it’ll change their fixed costs, and the marginal cost to serve Europe is probably relatively small compared to their fixed costs. I do think it’s most likely that they will end up…

It's a (successful?) lobbying attempt by Mistral. They are falling behind on tech and they want to win on another stupid EU law. You know what will happen next? There will be an exception carved in for "developing countries" ... like China.

... downvoting this account to the oblivion may feel good but it doesn't turn reality into "conspiracy theory" LOL. I am glad you are feeling better.

Re: The EU has begun enforcing the AI Act: first RFIs to model providers

#86

Post by Gerard22Aug »

satvikpendem wrote: post #8
Gerard22Aug wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a (successful?) lobbying attempt by Mistral. They are falling behind on tech and they want to win on another stupid EU law. You know what will happen next? There will be an exception carved in for "developing countries" ... like China.

Why would they, both the EU and Mistral specifically, want Chinese models? Isn't the (de facto, underlying) point of the act to raise up homegrown companies like Mistral?

"Why would they, both the EU and Mistral specifically, want Chinese models?" Multiple reasons. US behaving like aholes and forcing EU to make trade with China - in any case it's better tnan war. Cheaper inference HW from China to replace overpriced Nvidia crap. Open models so Mistral and Qwen / GLM may cross–distill. (Hint: why libraries and museums exchange books and arts?) Geopolitics, sanctions, digital EUR – I can't even explain to you all of it in one post which will be downvoted to grey again. And you probably have lost ability to think*. You believe only in what Opus or ChatGPT "summarises" for you. (This is another reason btw). Good luck.

Re: The EU has begun enforcing the AI Act: first RFIs to model providers

#87

Post by Voultapher »

jopsen wrote: post #82
thesumofall wrote: post #78

One can and must discuss and challenge all these regulations, but this seems better than just sliding carelessly into some sort of mega-corp dystopia. It is good to have some balance of power. Is the EU perfect? Absolutely not, but neither are the corporates. Ideally, compromises will be found (and mostly they are found). Honestly, what’s the worst that can happen here? If this slows down the European economy, that’s…

> Honestly, what’s the worst that can happen here? Regulation that cannot practically be implemented or complied with (example: forks of open models), this leads to selective enforcement and by extension corruption and loss of rule of law. Regulation before the market has even settled down, we don't know if AI will be datacenter only, or open models everybody forks, modifies and runs locally. And we won't know for a…

Distilling your own alcohol is technically trivial and process inputs are sold readily at every supermarket. So clearly we should just allow 15 year olds to buy hard liquor since we can't stop them .. HN baffles me again again with the whole because we can't do 100% 0% is better reasoning.

Re: The EU has begun enforcing the AI Act: first RFIs to model providers

#88

Post by Gerard22Aug »

stymaar wrote: post #28
satvikpendem wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't make any sense because Mistral wouldn't profit if Chinese models are allowed so not sure why the person above thinks the EU would add a China exemption.

Mistral is serving GLM in addition to their own models. But conspiracy theory don't have to make sense in the first place.

"Mistral is serving GLM " ... "But conspiracy theory don't have to make sense". To me this looks like an example of broken logical thinking, no? :-)

Re: The EU has begun enforcing the AI Act: first RFIs to model providers

#89

Post by brador »

rcarmo wrote: post #72

Started reading, saw “The timing is the story”, and my LLM-generated-spider-sense tingled. The piece is informative, but I now have no idea if the arguments are human or AI driven

Time to collect facts and start thinking for yourself again.

The age of written expertise influence is over.

Re: The EU has begun enforcing the AI Act: first RFIs to model providers

#90

Post by villish »

number6 wrote: post #64
villish wrote: post #29

The article only lists US labs, I wonder if that was an oversight. Chinese models are also available to Europeans through API providers. Surely they risk fines too.. right?

The regulations apply foremost to closed models. Chinese companies mostly release "open models". And regarding fines, well the track record for EU fines against any big tech companies, US or China, is abysmal. Even if the companies are fined, the fine goes uncollected or is slashed after the big press release. I am looking as the DSA here...

Why would they not apply to all models? The models with downloadable weights aren’t “open”. Meaning no one can actually give a summary about their training content and security. Which is what they’re asking US labs.
Post reply on HN