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

The EU AI act is coming, this time for real probably

wolfhf.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 298 posts

Re: The EU AI act is coming, this time for real probably

#221

Post by gumballindie »

zirgs wrote: post #205
gumballindie wrote: post #50

> While the AI Act’s references to copyright issues in generative AI are still very vague and only stress how much of a grey area it is, requiring providers of large models to be more transparent about their sources seems not a bad thing as such. As many aspects of the act it will be seen how this works out in practice. If my license prohibits use of my work for ai training, or requires that any modified code include…

You can't forbid others from learning from your work. If you want to prevent it then don't post it publicly.

Sorry, ai is not “others”, it’s software. This argument of yours is equal to if you dont want to get mugged dont go outside.

Re: The EU AI act is coming, this time for real probably

#222

Post by logicchains »

mschuster91 wrote: post #202
letmevoteplease wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The design of the American system was always based on a distrust for power. The gridlock is the point. Not my favorite person but Scalia put it well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ggz_gd--UO0

Eventually though it leads to a situation where no one has any trust left in government, which is extremely dangerous from a democracy perspective - it breeds resentment, splintering/secession and people taking the law into their own hands (or to put it bluntly, shooting at everything they deem a threat - including children playing hide-and-seek [1]). That's also the reason why there are so many doomsday preppers in…

> extremely dangerous from a democracy perspective

How is it extremely dangerous? Over a hundred million people died in the 20th century from trusting their government too much, nothing compares to that.

Re: The EU AI act is coming, this time for real probably

#223

Post by jraph »

gumballindie wrote: post #99
konschubert wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Big companies can afford regulations. They will do just fine with writing all the compliance documents But Small companies can’t afford the compliance overhead. And big companies can only develop out of small companies. So they will develop elsewhere

They said the same about GDPR and is working fine. If a company crosses me I just request data removal and call it a day. It's all good. I do hate GDPR popups tho.

> I do hate GDPR popups tho

They really are "let's annoy people people so they hate GDPR popups", not so much "GDPR popups".

You would not ask "can I track you?" to random people physically entering your store as a storekeeper.

Re: The EU AI act is coming, this time for real probably

#224

Post by smarx007 »

eimrine wrote: post #84
smarx007 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you actually read the proposed text of the AI act? I certainly want more oversight over a medical startup or airplane manufacturer doing AI in the essential system components than otherwise. I think adding a high-risk category is a brilliant move.

> Did you actually read the proposed text of the AI act? Are these 140 pages [1] the proposed text? [1] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2014_2019/plmrep/COM...

I think the last draft is under https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CONS... (starting with p. 59, the text before is the rationale memo) and the document you linked are the latest amendments suggested to it.

Re: The EU AI act is coming, this time for real probably

#225

Post by eimrine »

logicchains wrote: post #212
eimrine wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you Russian propagandist? They are probably the only actor nowadays who use to name some groups of European people as nazi with emphasis on some parades. Why not to name any group which fits what you are claiming - for letting us to see your guts without asks for some extra clarifications?

It's Russian propaganda to point out that the Azov brigade march with nazi flags and some even took selfies with photos of Hitler?

How am I supposed to answer about some event without any google-friendly markers of the event? Such as date?

Re: The EU AI act is coming, this time for real probably

#226

Post by logicchains »

fstokesman wrote: post #36
hackeraccount wrote: post #18

The people writing these regulations don't know what the problems of the future are. The problems of the present are tricky because every problem has a constituency (if it didn't it wouldn't be a problem.). The EU is trying to get around this by acting quickly before constituencies can develop. This will make no one happy - it's like my wife telling me that a car's going to hit me if I walk out the front door so she'…

> ...remote biometric identification systems in publicly accessible spaces, biometric categorisation systems (e.g. categorizing by gender, race, ethnicity, citizenship status, religion, political orientation) and the use of AI for predictive policing. > AI systems which can influence voters in political campaigns and by use of suggestion systems on very large platforms... > New transparency and risk assessment requir…

>New transparency and risk assessment requirements for providers of (generative) foundation models like GTP

This is absurd. For a relatively small sum in the grand scheme of things, I could rent a few A100s, download a free dataset and train a model like LLaMA 30B, which is comparable to GPT3 (and indeed there already are such efforts popping up). Such a law could potentially make it illegal to upload such a thing if you live in the EU without going through a potentially expensive and bureaucratic process. It will completely stifle AI development the same way requiring people to going through a bunch of paperwork to upload a new library would stifle web development.

Re: The EU AI act is coming, this time for real probably

#227

Post by robswc »

aqme28 wrote: post #109

I'm seeing lots of comments from fellow software engineers that seem to boil down to "all software regulation is bad" and I'd like to know where that's coming from, or if it's just a minority of the more libertarian-minded among us. Regulation can of course be a problem, but it can also do a lot of good to protect consumers. Do people feel this way about the FDA, the FAA, etc?

>Do people feel this way about the FDA, the FAA, etc?

To a degree sometimes. There is no benefit to regulators to allow for more risk, because they will be blamed if something goes wrong. There's hardly anything to gain (as a regulator) to take risk.

Re: The EU AI act is coming, this time for real probably

#228

Post by smarx007 »

robswc wrote: post #218
smarx007 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't see any effect from GDPR on tech talent migration. Any source on this?!

He probably means its just another factor in why there's very few startups/innovative companies in Europe. I did consulting and for a fair amount of projects where we had to block all European traffic while GDPR compliance was sorted out. There was almost never anything we had to actually do/change but the threat was looming and it was easier to just not take the risk.

That's a totally legit way of "complying" with GDPR. An unacceptable way to do this is to present a consent screen that restricts access if consent is denied but allows access otherwise (looking at you, Washington Post, but at least they provide an option to pay for a privacy-respecting experience). Cf §43.2 https://gdpr-info.eu/recitals/no-43/

Re: The EU AI act is coming, this time for real probably

#229

Post by logicchains »

wongarsu wrote: post #31

In general I find the EU AI act quite reasonable. There are a couple AI uses that will be prohibited (most mentioned by the article, mostly manipulating people or dystopian government stuff). But imho the meat of the act is in categorizing many use cases as "High Risk", which comes with a list of requirements. Things like putting some effort in thinking about risks, into your training data, understanding biases, havi…

>New transparency and risk assessment requirements for providers of (generative) foundation models like GTP

Anyone following the space would be aware that there's currently a huge Cambrian explosion of innovation in foundation models going on. Something like this, requiring you to go through a bunch of potentially expensive bureaucracy would completely kill this growth in the EU, to the benefit of the larger players.

Post reply on HN