16 ms·

Even the pro-privacy groups disagree with you. The (AI) Act leaves too much to the discretion of the Commission, secondary legislation or voluntary codes of co

Even the pro-privacy groups disagree with you. The (AI) Act leaves too much to the discretion of the Commission, secondary legislation or voluntary codes of conduct https://ecnl.org/news/packed-loopholes-why-ai-act-fails-protect-civic-space-and-rule-law https://ecnl.org/news/packed-loopholes-why-ai-act-fails-prot... This is the problem with the DMA and AI acts. The specifics are not written into law. Everything is left up to the EU Commissioner to decide as each case presents itself. Which makes it impossible for companies to predict what their decisions will be. And why would they take the risk with such massive fines on the table. This kind of regulatory uncertainty is toxic to business. Also Apple didn't just not release Apple Intelligence in the EU. They've geo-blocked it so you specifically can't use it even in English. They would only do this for legal reasons.

troupo 2y ago
> The specifics are not written into law. If all specifics were written into the law: - people would complain about government overreach and that government dictates technological solutions - no laws would ever be written because there are so many aspects to consider, and it's impossible to predict the future Facebook, for instance, could easily start with complying with the two bullet points I posted. They don't, and they fight the EU in courts claiming they have god-given right to user data. And yet you pretend that these companies are somehow victims. They are not. > Which makes it impossible for companies to predict what their decisions will be. This is PR and marketing bullshit. EU Commission literally talks to all the involved and interested parties, listens to their positions and invites them to present theirs. > They would only do this for legal reasons. Ahahhaha. Of course not.
- threeseed 2y ago
  > If all specifics were written into the law This approach works just fine in Australia which is renowned for having the best consumer protection regime in the world. It's just harder to do in EU/US when there isn't an appetite for pro-consumer regulations. And it's hilarious that you think that having to talk to the EU Commission to determine what is the law is somehow good. Businesses need certainty and predictability. Everything the EU regime is not.
  - troupo 2y ago
    > And it's hilarious that you think that having to talk to the EU Commission to determine what is the law is somehow good. No, it's not hilarious. This is literally what industry says it wants: instead of dictates by uncaring government you get a dialog with the industry that shapes the policy and lets the authorities adjust their approach.

troupo 2y ago

> The specifics are not written into law. If all specifics were written into the law: - people would complain about government overreach and that government dictates technological solutions - no laws would ever be written because there are so many aspects to consider, and it's impossible to predict the future Facebook, for instance, could easily start with complying with the two bullet points I posted. They don't, and they fight the EU in courts claiming they have god-given right to user data. And yet you pretend that these companies are somehow victims. They are not. > Which makes it impossible for companies to predict what their decisions will be. This is PR and marketing bullshit. EU Commission literally talks to all the involved and interested parties, listens to their positions and invites them to present theirs. > They would only do this for legal reasons. Ahahhaha. Of course not.

threeseed 2y ago
> If all specifics were written into the law This approach works just fine in Australia which is renowned for having the best consumer protection regime in the world. It's just harder to do in EU/US when there isn't an appetite for pro-consumer regulations. And it's hilarious that you think that having to talk to the EU Commission to determine what is the law is somehow good. Businesses need certainty and predictability. Everything the EU regime is not.
- troupo 2y ago
  > And it's hilarious that you think that having to talk to the EU Commission to determine what is the law is somehow good. No, it's not hilarious. This is literally what industry says it wants: instead of dictates by uncaring government you get a dialog with the industry that shapes the policy and lets the authorities adjust their approach.