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

Do Foundation Model Providers Comply with the EU AI Act?

crfm.stanford.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 75 posts

Re: Do Foundation Model Providers Comply with the EU AI Act?

#41

Post by supermatt »

Simon321 wrote: post #40

Seems to EU is determined to cripple their AI industry at all costs, we already have so little technology companies... Foundation models are labelled as 'high risk'! In my opinion this is way too premature... this would cripple open source AI as well... > While the act includes open source exceptions for traditional machine learning models, it expressly forbids safe-harbor provisions for open source generative system…

That article is pure FUD.

ALL the regulatory activity mentioned in the article is related to "high-risk" AI systems, which are specifically:

- where the AI is part of a safety system, and where that safety system already needs to undergo conformity assessment.

OR

- where the AI system poses a significant risk of harm to the health, safety or fundamental rights of natural persons - for very specific use-cases

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/resources/library/media/20230... (p122-125)

Re: Do Foundation Model Providers Comply with the EU AI Act?

#42

Post by Simon321 »

supermatt wrote: post #41
Simon321 wrote: post #40

Seems to EU is determined to cripple their AI industry at all costs, we already have so little technology companies... Foundation models are labelled as 'high risk'! In my opinion this is way too premature... this would cripple open source AI as well... > While the act includes open source exceptions for traditional machine learning models, it expressly forbids safe-harbor provisions for open source generative system…

That article is pure FUD. ALL the regulatory activity mentioned in the article is related to "high-risk" AI systems, which are specifically: - where the AI is part of a safety system, and where that safety system already needs to undergo conformity assessment. OR - where the AI system poses a significant risk of harm to the health, safety or fundamental rights of natural persons - for very specific use-cases https://…

If this wouldn't apply to these foundation models then why would they write an article on how they currently comply or not?

> We assess the compliance of 10 foundation model providers—and their flagship foundation models—with 12 of the Act’s requirements for foundation models

The whole point of this article is to see what would apply to theses models!

Re: Do Foundation Model Providers Comply with the EU AI Act?

#43

Post by Dylan16807 »

hdkrgr wrote: post #32
Dylan16807 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially for a server GPU, looking up watts and multiplying by time per token should give you a pretty good number.

Sure... but maybe the GPU is sitting idle 40% of the time while still consuming 200W. Should I have to break this idle energy consumption down onto actual use (assuming the server/gpu is only used for this one model)? I guess it would make sense, but... WHO should do this and then continually update the model documentation when idle rates or the hardware changes?

Listing it per server design (with groups) makes sense to me.

It wouldn't make sense to include measured idle time in the energy numbers you'd include in model documentation. Maybe that could go in a monthly report somewhere, but that's a different topic.

Re: Do Foundation Model Providers Comply with the EU AI Act?

#44

Post by lewhoo »

gyudin wrote: post #10
RamblingCTO wrote: post #3

I was actually fearing something very stupid coming from the EU, but the requirements/questions asked (if it's only that from the table) are fairly ok!

350 pages of ramblings that nobody who was voting for this act hasn't actually read?

Yeah but a two-page font size 20 alternative proposal would introduce a thousand obvious and another ten thousand non-obvious loopholes, much like that double negative of yours. (I'm not trying to be a grammar Nazi, English isn't my native lang either) One of the reasons why the Constitution of USA has to be interpreted constantly is because it's relatively short and vague.

Re: Do Foundation Model Providers Comply with the EU AI Act?

#45

Post by v7n »

Simon321 wrote: post #40

Seems to EU is determined to cripple their AI industry at all costs, we already have so little technology companies... Foundation models are labelled as 'high risk'! In my opinion this is way too premature... this would cripple open source AI as well... > While the act includes open source exceptions for traditional machine learning models, it expressly forbids safe-harbor provisions for open source generative system…

In my opinion it's about time to clarify rules and standards for automated systems that can for example kill someone if their output is incorrect.

Re: Do Foundation Model Providers Comply with the EU AI Act?

#46

Post by TekMol »

Is there a term for a country where ...

    - there are so many laws and regulations,
      that everybody is violating some of them

    - therefore only a tiny fraction can be
      brought to court

    - therefore everybody lives in the constant
      fear that they suddenly arbitrarily get
      crushed

?

Re: Do Foundation Model Providers Comply with the EU AI Act?

#47

Post by Simon321 »

v7n wrote: post #45
Simon321 wrote: post #40

Seems to EU is determined to cripple their AI industry at all costs, we already have so little technology companies... Foundation models are labelled as 'high risk'! In my opinion this is way too premature... this would cripple open source AI as well... > While the act includes open source exceptions for traditional machine learning models, it expressly forbids safe-harbor provisions for open source generative system…

In my opinion it's about time to clarify rules and standards for automated systems that can for example kill someone if their output is incorrect.

ChatGPT and stable diffusion are killing people now? I think incorrect output of regular software is actually killing people but we don't need a license to write code.

Re: Do Foundation Model Providers Comply with the EU AI Act?

#48

Post by RobotToaster »

supermatt wrote: post #41
Simon321 wrote: post #40

Seems to EU is determined to cripple their AI industry at all costs, we already have so little technology companies... Foundation models are labelled as 'high risk'! In my opinion this is way too premature... this would cripple open source AI as well... > While the act includes open source exceptions for traditional machine learning models, it expressly forbids safe-harbor provisions for open source generative system…

That article is pure FUD. ALL the regulatory activity mentioned in the article is related to "high-risk" AI systems, which are specifically: - where the AI is part of a safety system, and where that safety system already needs to undergo conformity assessment. OR - where the AI system poses a significant risk of harm to the health, safety or fundamental rights of natural persons - for very specific use-cases https://…

>where the AI system poses a significant risk of harm to the health

We've seen pushes from both sides to redefine anything they disagree with as harmful to mental health.

Re: Do Foundation Model Providers Comply with the EU AI Act?

#50

Post by senko »

hdkrgr wrote: post #32
Dylan16807 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially for a server GPU, looking up watts and multiplying by time per token should give you a pretty good number.

Sure... but maybe the GPU is sitting idle 40% of the time while still consuming 200W. Should I have to break this idle energy consumption down onto actual use (assuming the server/gpu is only used for this one model)? I guess it would make sense, but... WHO should do this and then continually update the model documentation when idle rates or the hardware changes?

The organizations that release the models already provide (brag about) their model performance. They could simply include in the same report the info about the energy spent doing the training/finetuning/inference, per X tokens.

This doesn't necessarily measure every use, just "manufacturer's spec", the same you get for eg energy class for house appliances (at least in the EU). Nobody goes around measuring refrigerator power usage, but when you're buying one, you get a rough indication of how "green" (or not) it is.

Post reply on HN