Europe's AI crackdown starts this week and Big Tech isn't happy It is a little more than four years since the European Union first proposed legislation to govern tech companies that build AI systems and how users deploy them. A lot has changed since then. In November 2022, OpenAI launched ChatGPT, which – as well as being able to write convincing poems – tempted tech businesses to question …
Completely agree.
Any time any of these companies start saying anything is wrong, all it means is it's wrong for them, which by extension means "this will hurt our profits".
Since "their profits" in this case are built upon various forms of creative material they themselves did not pay for, I can only think this is positive news for the rest of us.
Best example are the food regulations, what is sold in supermarkets in the "land of the free", would be disposed of in special chemical dumps in Europe by men in white pressured suits wearing masks.
In a world where greedy CEO's of food producing companies pose as much a health risk for the population as fentanyl dealers do, strict regulations might reduce probability on an obesity, diabetes or cancer epidemic like the "land of the free" is suffering from.
AI is yet another technology, controlled by Big-Tech companies who are already having an unhealthy amount of power over societies.
If they are let off the hook with this, corporate greed combined with the rich amounts of information and control over citizens they grant to governments, the essays of George Orwell will look like a joke within a decade.
>Not read the news much lately have we?
Yeah but that's only after how long?
He's only doing any sort of recognition of Palestine now because:
A) The right wing rags have found it salient to bash them on it.
B) Can't let the frogs (Macron) make them look bad.
And as well, he's made it conditional. Soft-ball conditions Israel could fulfill if it weren't set on annihilating any goodwill for itself.
Counting on the genocidaires to act on good faith? I expect this from Republicans here, not a labour party with a fucking human rights lawyer in the big seat.
"I expect this from Republicans here, not a labour party with a fucking human rights lawyer in the big seat."
Relevant disclosures: I'm a civil servant, I see government from both inside and out. I lean towards centre right politics, but see that Starmer came in with a good strategy (the government missions) a willingness to take unpopular decisions, and a focus on the big picture. Unfortunately pre-election commitments on tax and spend dramatically tied his hands, and thanks to dodgy Conservative accounting that became far more restrictive than they hoped.
Starmer has a problem that Labour won the last election entirelyfor not being the Tories, they actually saw their total votes down 6% on the 2019 election, and even in 2019 their vote count was down 20% on the 2017 election. Essentially, Labour struggle to make themselves electable, and their intellectual influences are still stuck in the late 1960s as any regular Guardian reader knows. The idea of the working class socialist masses slaving in the mills is dead, and yet Labour don't see that "working class masses" are now electricians, plumbers, the more skilled builders, smaller traders, all of whom are inherently more vested in more right wing small state, lower taxes, lower regulation beliefs. For the duration of this parliament you might say that doesn't matter, but when so many of his MPs are not aligned with the public mood (not just on tax and spend, but on other social issues) he's at risk of a no confidence vote or leadership challenge if he annoys his own MPs; And if kow-tows to them and spends and taxes more, the bond market will rip the rug out under his really rather good chancellor, as the Conservatives found when they tried Government-by-Lettuce.
So the position on Palestine is more about avoiding problems with his own back benchers, and trying not to further alienate any more of the wider electorate.
Wake me when they actually sue any American company these days given Trump's recent comments.*
They know OpenAI is now retaining data meant to be deleted but have done nothing, effectively putting the interest of large foreign companies over their own citizens' whom they are meant to represent.**
Meanwhile they enact laws like this which will only be applied to domestic audiences in effect, and likely stall innovation. Spectacular own goal, like ID checks on websites forcing non domestic VPN and dark web use making intelligence agencies job harder (Vs asking ISPs for logs under an existing terrorism law)
* Via Vance, that they'd withhold NATO aid if the EU continued to sue US companies, despite the two being different entities.
** OpenAI have said the data can be segregated by location, so really no excuse for not deleting for the GDPR regions. However in their US court case they appealed that all data should be deleted, despite the fact that the only regions' chat logs they need to delete is non US, which they are therefore always going to lose because of the US inclusion. Almost seems like they actually have something to hide, and need justification to get rid of all data, no?
It doesn't really matter what the EU decide.
Any regulations regarding AI must be globally achieved or they achieve nothing. There's no third way here. At best they change where the model is trained, but cannot alter that the model is trained or upon what it is trained.
You can't even unilaterally regulate derivative products as there's no link back to what created them, where, or it's regulatory stance at the time.
The real danger isn’t just bad tech, it’s who controls the story and data , how doea this work with various AI tools? META / GPT / RUSKIai / SaudiAI .
Historically, power lay with priests or bureaucrats; today it lies with Big Tech and algorithmic systems.
EXAMPLE : if AI replaced your MP, would you seriously notice any difference?
How about a launch for Tesla Cybertruck where AI generates a scene where Elon Musk hits the windscreen of a Cybertruck with a hammer, and the hammer just rebounds, with no damage to the windscreen. That's ok? Would that be the same as reality? - would buyers be misled by the AI campaign video about the strength of the windscreen?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
