15 ms·
EU Artificial Intelligence Act
- netfortius 3y agoUS congress may be trying to do something, also: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/congress-took-on-ai-regulation--and-raised-a-lot-more-questions-than-answers-185553310.html https://finance.yahoo.com/news/congress-took-on-ai-regulatio...
- cookieperson 3y agoLooks like it's being treated as a dual use weapon. Pretty sane to me.
- dogma1138 3y agoAbout as (in)sane as how PGP was treated as a weapon…
- cookieperson 3y agoYea except this can and already is doing harm. Just you wait ;)
- dogma1138 3y agoDo you mean this law or “AI”?
- cjg_ 3y agoNote that this is not an official EU website, but by a non-profit organization https://futureoflife.org/ https://futureoflife.org/
- mdp2021 3y agoThe Annexes ( https://artificialintelligenceact.eu/annexes/ https://artificialintelligenceact.eu/annexes/ ) contain a definition of "High risks AI systems" at Annex III. -- Incidentally, for the many who claimed on these pages that we would not "have a definition of AI" (actually we have several), well, this legislative text provides one: software with the ability, for a given set of human-defined objectives, to generate outputs such as content, predictions, recommendations, or decisions which influence the environment with which the system interacts, employing techniques including (a) Machine learning approaches, including supervised, unsupervised and reinforcement learning, using a wide variety of methods including deep learning; (b) Logic- and knowledge-based approaches, including knowledge representation, inductive (logic) programming, knowledge bases, inference and deductive engines, (symbolic) reasoning and expert systems; (c) Statistical approaches, Bayesian estimation, search and optimization methods
- amadeuspagel 3y agoIs there any recommendation engine which would not count as AI according to this definition?
- johnchristopher 3y agoThe HN definition torture engine would agree, depending of course on which knobs you turn.
- mdp2021 3y ago> Is there Yes (oddly enough): arithmetic based.
- duxup 3y agoI’m an AI engineer and I didn’t even know it… At least based on that mess of words I am.
- gradys 3y ago“Symbolic reasoning” used to make “decisions which influence the environment with which the system interacts” could describe almost all real world computer systems, could it not?
- nopenotthat 3y agoYup, it’s so laughably broad that almost any software that a user interacts with could come under that definition.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- nopenotthat 3y ago[dead]
- nonethewiser 3y agoThere was a great article on this recently that cuts through the EU’s dressing: EU AI Act To Target US Open Source Software https://technomancers.ai/eu-ai-act-to-target-us-open-source-software/ https://technomancers.ai/eu-ai-act-to-target-us-open-source-... TLDR it imposes ridiculous constraints on github and open source developers
- rover0 3y agoThat site has some questionalble views, for example https://technomancers.ai/pardon-elizabeth-holmes/ https://technomancers.ai/pardon-elizabeth-holmes/
- moffkalast 3y agoWell the draft proposal it references seems official, I haven't skimmed through it yet to see if it checks out or not: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2014_2019/plmrep/COMMITTEES/CJ40/DV/2023/05-11/ConsolidatedCA_IMCOLIBE_AI_ACT_EN.pdf https://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2014_2019/plmrep/COM...
- nonethewiser 3y agoThis seems like an ad hominem. Why not engage with the content of the artcicle before hand waving it away?
- thr-nrg 3y ago[flagged]
- Myrmornis 3y agoI hope all of us have some questionable views!
- miohtama 3y agoAlso the post itself has some factual errors.
- mrtksn 3y ago
- duringmath 3y agoWhy is everyone in a hurry to regulate AI? I can't think of one example where someone was harmed by an LLM. Besides "AI" is largely a marketing term, most software has "AI" elements and that has been the case for a while now, this thing has "unintended consequences" written all over it.
- CamperBob2 3y agoThey're regulators. That's what they do. That's all they do.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- seydor 3y agoNo , it wasn't always like that. The EU has gone on overdrive lately but that's not because EU citizens asked for it. This is mostly brussels people regulating popular subjects because ... they want to be associated with things that are popular. There is really little else to explain what's happening in the EU in the past 5 years. As a citizen I am concerned by this "tyrranny from Brussels" because my opinion never seems to have mattered nor were EU citizens informed before the fact.
- bitL 3y agoPower grab and preservation. This will be quickly approved to preserve existing players and power status quo (lawyers, managers and doctors don't want to be automated away).
- felipemnoa 3y agoIf an AI comes along that is able to do their job better than them then they will not have a say in that. No matter how many regulations the government puts up. Is like trying to regulate cars to save the horse shoe industry. And if doctors can be automated away so can software developers. I guess in the long term we are all obsolete.
- VWWHFSfQ 3y agoArticle 10 requires that > all training data be "relevant, representative, free of errors and complete." This is especially interesting to me with regard to something like ChatGPT. As we know, ChatGPT occasionally gives factually incorrect information. Does this mean that, in its current form, it would be illegal in EU? We know that Google is currently blocking access to Bard in EU. Will ChatGPT be forced to follow suit? ChatGPT is great and I love it. It would be a shame if I'm not even allowed to use it _at my own risk_ just because it might be wrong about some things. This seems like a simplification, but it sounds like EU is allowing Perfect to be the enemy of Good.
- RobotToaster 3y agoWill be interesting for copilot, given all the buggy half finished projects on github that would have been included in it's training data.
- jstx1 3y agoThe quoted sentence is about training data, not about the output of the model, they're different things.
- m463 3y agoI wonder what "representative" means in relation to human behavior? does it mean "must collect ALL data"?
- holistio 3y agoThe act is dated 21. 4. 2021. More than two years old. 1.) being a part of the team working on this has to be among the most exciting legal jobs in Brussels 2.) I did not have time to read the entire act, not even sure if I'd understand it, but I'd be curious how much of it is still relevant given the leaps in both tech and especially popularity in the last two years.
- neom 3y agoI was trying to understand more about AIA today after it was mentioned a few times in the oversight committee thing. Found this talk, it's is pretty good, I thought it was going to be lame content marketing but the guest is a real lawyer who seems to have a real understanding of AI and what is going on: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoIC5EPPfn4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoIC5EPPfn4 (feel like all my HN posts are always revealing the embarrassing about of youtube I watch)
- FloatArtifact 3y agoI'd rather see agencies certify AI to standards rather than regulatory on development of AI models.
- riazrizvi 3y ago“Unacceptable risk”, “high risk”, “force for good”. Terms as vague and broad as an interstellar gas cloud. It makes me wonder if this is a strawman argument against regulation.
- shon 3y agoInteresting, from the site: “applications, such as a CV-scanning tool that ranks job applicants, are subject to specific legal requirement” This is a continuation of EU logic first seen in GDPR around what that law calls “automated decision making”. All I can say is that GDPR hasn’t had a good effect. Partly because It’s not well written from a technical perspective. GDPR demands explainable and auditable automation. Non-deterministic AI systems make this difficult or impossible with current tech. So to be “compliant”, vendors dumb-down their software to use explainable methods and often inferior hiring decisions are made because users have to operate on untenable amounts of data using basic sorts. So the Talent Acquisition team end up structuring the hiring process around “disqualifers” such as resume gaps, education requirements, pre-interview qualification tests, etc. It reminds me of an old recruiting joke: “Recruiter: You said you only wanted to interview the 5 best applicants but we are getting so many applicants we don’t know where to start. Hiring Manager: OK, first, I only hire lucky people. Print out all of the resumes and throw away every other one.” Interestingly, if this process is done randomly without reviewing the resume, it’s considered legal.
- makeitdouble 3y agoIt comes down to how you prove your blackbox is better than a biased but auditable (and fixable) process. Even doing a few dozen audits of the AI run and coming up with better results, how can you assume these results will be consistent across thousands of resumes that will be blindly scanned ? Usually stats could be applied, except as it's a black box, can we assume that behavior will have cobsistency ? (a dumb example: if the AI is somewhat influenced by dates, decision will drastically change as time goes by)
- Zpalmtree 3y agoDoes the EU ever get tired of proposing terrible innovation crushing laws?
- OhNoNotAgain_99 3y ago[dead]
- rad_gruchalski 3y agoNo, they get paid for all that work.
- abujazar 3y agoAt first glance this looks like official information, but in fact it's a campaign site from https://futureoflife.org https://futureoflife.org and should be clearly marked as such.
- IAmGraydon 3y agoI wonder if all those calling ChatGPT and the like “AI” when it’s nothing of the sort regret doing so now. AI is a scary word for certain groups, while machine learning (which is what this is) isn’t. Now you have a bunch of Luddites with pitchforks looking for a witch to burn. What this act will do is severely stunt the European economy compared to the rest of the world, which will be racing ahead (as long as countries like the US don’t pass similar laws). By the time Europe realizes its mistake, it will be too late to catch up.
- tpoacher 3y agoSo what's AI then?
- IAmGraydon 3y agoA machine that can think, not a machine that spits out strings of text that fool humans into believing it can think. The map is not the territory.
- soVeryTired 3y ago> The map is not the territory. Turing would argue that if the map resembles the territory so faithfully that you can't distinguish between them, the difference is moot. We're not there yet, but we're a hell of a lot closer than we were ten years ago.
- makeitdouble 3y agoThe act is about automated processes, "AI" or not.
- IAmGraydon 3y agoDo you think it’s coincidence that it came about during the middle of a massive hype wave with widespread talk of how AI will figuratively take over the world? Automated processes have existed for nearly 100 years.
- OhNoNotAgain_99 3y ago[dead]
- jdiez17 3y agoFor anyone who is jumping to the comments to complain about how more rules from the EU is going to make innovation difficult, I highly recommend you to read the summary presentation: https://www.ceps.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/AI-Presentation-CEPS-Webinar-L.-Sioli-23.4.21.pdf https://www.ceps.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/AI-Presentati... Basically, as I understand it, it divides AI systems (in the broadest sense Machine Learning sense) into risk categories: unacceptable risk (prohibited), high risk, medium/other risk, and low risk. Applications in the high risk category include medical devices, law enforcement, recruiting/employment and others. AI systems in this category will be subject to the requirements mentioned by most people here (oversight, clean and correct training data, etc). Medium risk applications seem to revolve around the risk of tricking people, for example via chatbots, deepfakes etc. In this case they require to “notify” people that they are interacting with an AI or that the content was generated by AI. How this can be enforced in practice remains to be seen. And the low risk category is basically everything else, from marketing applications to ChatGPT (as I understand it). Applications in this category would have no mandatory obligations. If you ask me, that’s a quite sensible approach.
- kortilla 3y agoHow is recruiting higher risk than deepfakes?
- alwayseasy 3y agoAs in a deepfake customer service rep. Not a deepfake President of the United States declaring he's leaving NATO.
- mrtksn 3y agoSystematic discrimination in employment because the AI said so because the data was biased can ghettos and riots. Deepfakes are a storm in a teacup. Remember how OpenAI's Dall-E lost to Stable Diffusion because they were too afraid that someone will make an image of a politician or something? Well we had some fun with Pope wearing Balenciaga and Trump being arrested but nothing bad happened.
- 3y ago
- piotr-yuxuan 3y agoTo add some more context it's funded by Elon Musk [0] and Vitalik Buterin [1] (source [2]). [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_Musk https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_Musk [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitalik_Buterin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitalik_Buterin [2] https://ec.europa.eu/transparencyregister/public/consultation/displaylobbyist.do?id=787064543128-10 https://ec.europa.eu/transparencyregister/public/consultatio...
- jgalt212 3y agoBrussels is so very good at crafting laws that are unenforceable.
- YeGoblynQueenne 3y agoThis is a very misleading website. It has an ".eu" domain name but it's nothing to do with the EU, rather it's from the Future of Life Institute. This is bad because those people (the FLI) have weird political motivations, that do not automatically align with EU and human rights legislation that the new AI regulations try to protect. Whatever interpretation the FLI places on the EU act, should be treated with suspicion because of that.