Astro Hacker News - EU rules on AI models become enforceable. What's going to change?

pelorat |next [-]

> EU rules on AI models become enforceable. What's going to change?

I can answer that. A higher regulatory overhead that means less money for R&D and decreased profit margins for companies here in the EU. That's what's going to happen.

xinayder |root |parent |next [-]

If your sole business model depends on having no regulation then your business model is wrong and predatory.

Regulation doesn't hinder innovation, it's just that CEOs want that quick buck instead of being responsible and using regulation for their advantage.

WarmWash |root |parent |next |previous [-]

Also going to have to compete against SOTA AI augmented American companies. Which likely means using Chinese models.

Thank god Xi Jinpeng has the best interests of Europe at heart...

DarkNova6 |root |parent |next |previous [-]

Thanks, now I don't need to even read the article!

moffkalast |root |parent |previous [-]

Mistral's already in the gutter, so not much change overall.

sixtyj |next |previous [-]

> The rulebook sets out rules for all models that lack a specific purpose but can be adapted to a variety of use cases, requiring transparency on how a model was built, disclosure of any copyright-protected content used for training, and enough information for downstream users to understand the model's capabilities.

Re. disclosure: How do they want to do it? It seems to be similar to a “disclosure” used in students’ works: “Source: internet”…

Retr0id |root |parent [-]

No copyright intended

cubefox |next |previous [-]

> In practice, for European consumers and businesses, that might mean some of the most advanced AI models launch in the EU a few weeks later than in other markets, as firms ensure they have done their compliance homework.

As models become more capable, this could have serious economic consequences. :(

jay_kyburz |root |parent [-]

Seems to be that the compliance homework is exactly the kind of busy work that AI is good at. AI companies could just get AI to do it.

kamma4434 |next |previous [-]

New pop-ups and more unreadable clauses you have to agree to. Remember GDPR?

elcdodedocle |root |parent |next [-]

GDPR is more than that. Consent or not, there are things bad actors can do in the USA that in the EU they just can't. Specially to children and vulnerable people. GDPR is an integral part of it. This is a small but significant first step in the right direction. Long way ahead still.

hellisothers |root |parent |next [-]

Maybe but it feels like 1 step forward and 2 steps back. It feels like in the end they’re (companies) still getting 99% of what they had before and the user experience of everything is much worse.

dev_l1x_be |root |parent |previous [-]

Yes I used it when Confluence had a bug and an account with got stuck and there was no way to delete my account of finish the registration. So I issued a GDPR delete request and re-created the account. tada.wav

MaxMatti |root |parent [-]

I've heard lots of people use it to actually find out what you were being banned for even when the company absolutely does not want to disclose it.

embedding-shape |root |parent |next |previous [-]

Remember when HN used to have somewhat informed users? The trite cookie popups have nothing to do with GDPR, this has been repeated ad nauseam...

jstummbillig |root |parent |next [-]

GDPR (and ePrivacy before that) requires valid prior consent where optional tracking is used. A site using only technically necessary storage can simply have no consent banner. A business wanting advertising and analytics trackers generally needs some consent interface.

"Not a requirement under GDPR", yes, but certainly not "nothing to do with GDPR". It directly has to do with GDPR, in conjunction with business' decisions and how to comply with the law.

And of course, we can then argue our faces off about what's good and necessary in the world, in businesses and data protection, but saying it has nothing to do with it is just wrong.

DarkNova6 |root |parent |next |previous [-]

This being downvoted speaks saddens my heart... and proves the exact intent of the message.

dgellow |root |parent |next |previous [-]

It’s insane how that misinformation doesn’t want to die. In 100y we will still have people repeating that we get popup because of gdpr, and nobody will know what a popup or gdpr is

Retr0id |root |parent [-]

Is it really misinformation? The popups may largely be a result of misunderstandings or malicious compliance, but GDPR has a causal relationship regardless of the intent.

inigyou |root |parent |next [-]

When the city writes an ordinance saying chemical factories must have fire alarms I do not blame the city for the fire alarm noise.

Retr0id |root |parent [-]

I would however blame them if they wrote an ordinance that was widely misunderstood to mean that someone had to knock on my door each day to make sure I knew the local chemical factory had a fire alarm.

buran77 |root |parent |next |previous [-]

> GDPR has a causal relationship regardless of the intent.

You can extend causality as far as you want if you're willing to sound like this in the open. If there were no cookies, there'd be no banners. There, found you a new target.

So on one side you have decent regulation that tries to balance the interest of the user without over regulating and becoming too prescriptive, and on the other side you have abusers who most of the times are actually in malicious non-compliance... and you find a way to blame the regulation.

Good thing it's in the rules that HN is not Reddit.

watwut |root |parent |previous [-]

Popups have nothing to do with GDPR. They are reaction to Privacy and Electronic Communications Directive which predates GDPR.

And yes, it is deliberate misinformation.

Retr0id |root |parent [-]

Cookie popups pre-date GRPR, but find it hard to believe the uptick in popups that happened around May 2018 was in response to legislation from 2003.

watwut |root |parent |previous [-]

This is heavily downvoted ... and still accurate.

watwut |root |parent |previous [-]

GDPR is actually good directive. Despite perpetual campaign against it from HN users who would like to abuse other peoples data.

j45 |previous [-]

The doers vs talkers of who can make AI accurate and consistent will step forward.