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

241–250 of 298 posts

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

#241

Post by alasdair_ »

andrewmutz wrote: post #231
wokwokwok wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

? Do you think there’s some kind of karmic point scoring system that you win by being the first one to build horrible unethical dystopian AI models? Or are you just complaining you won’t be able to horrifically exploit people using them to make lots of money? …because, sure, red tape is bad, but is it ultimately that terrible not being a allowed to be super villain? “But America has super villains! …! We’re being lef…

I think he is saying that laws have unintended consequences. And a law with good intentions (preventing bad AI outcomes) can have the unintended effect of discouraging entrepreneurs from choosing europe to build a new company. I know plenty of people who avoid the healthcare sector because of HIPAA and avoid handling credit card data because of PCI. PCI and HIPAA are well-intentioned but can scare off innovators.

PCI isn’t a law. It’s a standard that the free market decided upon by itself. You’re making the exact opposite point than the one you are intending to make.

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

#242

Post by Taywee »

zeroonetwothree wrote: post #206
Taywee wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's as unanswerable a question as "how many lives would have been lost by dangerous medications with long-term side effects that didn't become apparent in the term of testing?" We can't really know whether it was a net good or a net bad because we can't take a look at the reality that didn't happen. What we do know is that there were deadly medications on the market before the FDA. There were medications available o…

Actually there is a huge amount of research into this. The wide consensus seems to be that the FDA is far too conservative and overall having more lax approvals would have saved many more lives in net.

I would like to see this research.

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

#243

Post by sofixa »

robertlagrant wrote: post #154
sofixa wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Americans wouldn't know real innovation if a walkable neighborhood arrived on a highspeed train and began eliminating healthcare bureaucracy. Thanks for the laugh, beautifully put. In general I agree with your point, Americans hyperfocus on certain types of innovation (reinventing this or that wheel, "revolutionising X", like every single bullshit "reinventing transportation" "like a train, but much worse" proposal…

I think the big difference is the US is customer-focused, and the EU is employee-focused. To be stereotypical: in the US organisations exist to provide value people choose to pay for (e.g. electric cars; cheap rocketry; cheaper accommodation for travel; cheaper and much more convenient taxis); in the EU they exist to employ people, and hopefully they provide value, but if they don't provide much it's fine because it'…

> I think the big difference is the US is customer-focused, and the EU is employee-focused

I think this is simply untrue. US is profit focused above all, customer experience be damned. If you need examples, check Boeing killing people to get a plane out as soon as possible with ridiculously bad engineering choices; railroad companies skimping on decades old safety tech to keep profits as high as possible; healthcare being the quagmire that it is; massive companies posting record profits while laying off employees en masse; extremely customer hostile practices like like selling customer data everywhere; abusive pricing models on basic infrastructure like internet and mobile; etc. etc.

The only segment I can think about where you can legitimately say "customer-focused" is in hospitality, and that's only because employees have to, them getting any money depending directly on customers being very happy. For me it's to annoying extents though.

> in the EU they exist to employ people, and hopefully they provide value, but if they don't provide much it's fine because it's pretty difficult to start a competitor anyway.

Also disagree. That's not how things work, even in flag airlines, let alone private companies. And no, it's not difficult to start a competitor outside of capital-intensive market segments, which is the same everywhere.

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

#244

Post by Taywee »

endisneigh wrote: post #187
Taywee wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think governments are infallible, and I didn't argue as such. I don't agree that regulations are inherently bad. If you want to race to the bottom, I can easily pull out some extreme scenario of giving AK-47's to every citizen upon graduating Kindergarten, but it would be a stupid argument based on nothing you've actually said, other than taking your point to the most extreme extent. Please give me the courte…

> People driving drunk do profound damage as well. Cars don't kill people on their own. Would you agree with making drunk driving legal again? No, because drunk driving inhibits your ability to operate a vehicle lawfully. a better example would be using your phone while driving. should this be illegal? it's well documented that using your phone, even if hands-free increases car accidents. should phones be designed to…

It is still a regulation, and supports the argument that a tool that can be used to do damage should have rules to reduce the risk and severity of damage where reasonable.

There are already laws governing phone use while driving in many places. In my experience, people using phones while driving can be extremely dangerous, and I've often wished that people couldn't do so.

My AK-47 example was intentionally silly, and was framed as something silly and extreme, as a direct comparison to you accusing me of believing that government was infallible. I'm not sure why you're pointing out that something I explicitly pointed out as extreme and unreasonable is extreme and unreasonable. That was the entire point: that we will get nowhere by attacking straw men.

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

#245

Post by AbrahamParangi »

Taywee wrote: post #169
AbrahamParangi wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah it really can’t though. If there’s mercury in the tuna that’s obviously and unequivocally bad. If there’s funny memes supporting the other political party that’s supposed to be equivalent?

This comment is so disingenuous it's ridiculous. It's like opposing gun regulation with some contrived scenario about water pistols and Nerf guns.

It is enough to recognize that at minimum, people disagree about which software things cause harm whereas people overwhelming recognize that lead in food is bad.

Given that reasonable people disagree, it's not even close to comparable.

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

#246

Post by dorchadas »

zeroonetwothree wrote: post #220
renjimen wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The intention is to protect the rights and wellbeing of citizens. It’s short-termism to allow unfettered productivity gains at the expense of the populace.

And who exactly do productivity gains benefit?

Not the populace, that's for damn sure. The uber-wealthy who capture even more of the wealth and then use whatever legal tricks they can to avoid paying taxes on it, all while weakening the power power of the other classes.

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

#247

Post by aqme28 »

jkeisling wrote: post #237
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?

Yes, as a matter of fact, I do. If you look at even the US regulatory environment, for example: FDA approval for new drugs takes decades and billions, and enough said on America's "War on Drugs". The NRC has practically strangled nuclear power in its cradle, and environmental review adds years and millions to practically all new infrastructure. Health insurance regulation and financial regulation have enshrined a few…

Maybe we disagree on a fundamental level then. Even though the FDA, NRC, FAA, etc overregulate and stifle somewhat, I think they are a net good and that a regulation-free environment would not be a better situation.

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

#248

Post by dorchadas »

oh_sigh wrote: post #239
mitchdoogle wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand what you're arguing for. You want the EU to throw ethics out the window to encourage business growth?

No one us saying throw ethics out, they just see a different risk/reward balance than the EU regulatory bodies

One that seems to pretty much throw ethics out the window.

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

#249

Post by oblio »

brookst wrote: post #26
oblio wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The jury's still out on whether software is an unalloyed good.

Straw man. Nobody would say that. Is the jury still out on whether software does more good than harm?

Some categories, for sure.

We have no idea about the impact of AI.

It's almost like the EU is regulating stuff that's really scary.

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

#250

Post by ttjjtt »

cmilton wrote: post #72
ttjjtt wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the results of the last few decades of tech optimism have been so utterly dismal? And all the other results of the neo lib deregulation dream which, we’re most of us are either quietly panicked or despondent about.

>Because the results of the last few decades of tech optimism have been so utterly dismal? Can you expound upon this a bit? In my view, we have witnessed astonishing progress in tech over the last few decades. >neo lib deregulation dream What is your dream?

I meant to specify social results. Innovation is valuable only in so far as it raises the well-being of society as a whole. All the critical measures of this are going in the wrong direction.

Technological advancement might be astonishingly fast but that gives no indication of its value.

10-15 years ago used I knew a good few tech optimists, including myself & would regularly encounter more. Now, I don’t know one, and it’s odd to encounter one. The mood has shifted. VC fuelled platform capitalism has now unfolded.

From earlier today: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35901537

Everyone’s deepest dream is an ever kinder society where everyone can thrive. It just gets distorted by short term incentives of power. Hence regulation.

Post reply on HN