Live data from Hacker News

E.U. reaches deal on landmark AI bill, racing ahead of U.S.

washingtonpost.com

1–10 of 18 posts

Re: E.U. reaches deal on landmark AI bill, racing ahead of U.S.

#7
post #4
post #3

And once again we are reminded why large technical advances happen outside of the EU

Which advancements are you thinking of? The two decade long development of Meta's untamed surveillance apparatus?

Yeah... having multiple trillon dollar companies doesnt have any advantage at all... High paying jobs? Taxes? Brain drain? No getting your citizens data exposed to other countries? Nope, nothing.

Re: E.U. reaches deal on landmark AI bill, racing ahead of U.S.

#8
post #3

And once again we are reminded why large technical advances happen outside of the EU

I doubt regulations are the issue. In fact the internet was invented at CERN and plenty of unicorns started the in the EU (Spotify, Skype, etc).

I think the EU is a way behind because of a lack of investment in startups.

Edit:

Like 90% of de audio dev industry is in Europe (Native instruments, Ableton, Steinberg, UVI, Arturia, etc).

Re: E.U. reaches deal on landmark AI bill, racing ahead of U.S.

#9
post #8
post #3

And once again we are reminded why large technical advances happen outside of the EU

I doubt regulations are the issue. In fact the internet was invented at CERN and plenty of unicorns started the in the EU (Spotify, Skype, etc). I think the EU is a way behind because of a lack of investment in startups. Edit: Like 90% of de audio dev industry is in Europe (Native instruments, Ableton, Steinberg, UVI, Arturia, etc).

> In fact the internet was invented at CERN…

In fact, it was not.

Re: E.U. reaches deal on landmark AI bill, racing ahead of U.S.

#10

It's easy to be generous with other people's technological advancements. I'm starting to think that the US senate is a feature and not a bug.

As Antonin Scalia (Supreme Court Justice) said to the US Senate ..."learning to love the gridlock"

"And I hear Americans saying this nowadays, and there's a lot of it going around. They talk about a "dysfunctional government" because there's disagreement.

And the Framers would have said, "Yes, that's exactly the way we set it up. We wanted this to be power contradicting power -- because the main ill that beset us" -- as Hamilton said in The Federalist when he talked about a separate Senate -- He said, "Yes, it seems inconvenient, but inasmuch as the main ill that besets us is an excess of legislation, it won't be so bad."

This is 1787 -- he didn't know what an excess of legislation was."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ggz_gd--UO0

Post reply on HN