4 ms·

EU regulations are sometimes able to bully the world into compliance (eg. cookies). Usually minorities are able to impose "wins" on a majority when the price o

EU regulations are sometimes able to bully the world into compliance (eg. cookies). Usually minorities are able to impose "wins" on a majority when the price of compliance is lower than the price of defiance. This is not the case with AI. The stakes are enormous. AI is full steam ahead and no one is getting in the way short of nuclear war.

oaiey 1y ago
But AI also carries tremendous risks, from something simple as automating warfare to something like a evil AGI. In Germany we have still traumas from automatic machine guns setup on the wall between East and West Germany. The Ukraine is fighting a drone war in the trenches with a psychological effect on soldiers comparable to WWI. Stake are enormous. Not only toward the good. There is enough science fiction written about it. Regulation and laws are necessary!
- zettabomb 1y ago
  I don't disagree that we need regulation, but I also think citing literal fiction isn't a good argument. We're also very, very far away from anything approaching AGI, so the idea of it becoming evil seems a bit far fetched.
  - HighGoldstein 1y ago
    Autonomous sentry turrets have already been a thing since the 2000s. If we assume that military technology is always at least some 5-10 years ahead of civilian, it is likely that some if not all of the "defense" contractors have far more terrifying autonomous weapons.
  - ben_w 1y ago
    I agree fiction is a bad argument. On the other hand, firstly every single person disagrees what the phrase AGI means, varying from "we've had it for years already" to "the ability to do provably impossible things like solve the halting problem"; and secondly we have a very bad track record for knowing how long it will take to invent anything in the field of AI with both positive and negative failures, for example constantly thinking that self driving cars are just around the corner vs. people saying an AI that could play Go well was "decades" away a mere few months before it beat the world champion.
  - tim333 1y ago
    Did you catch the news about Grok wanting to kill the jews last week? All you need for AI or AGI to be evil is a prompt saying be evil.
  - ken47 1y ago
    We don't need AGI in order for AI to destroy humanity.
- chii 1y ago
  regulation does not stop weapons from being created that utilizes AI. It only slows down honest states that try to abide by it, and gives the dishonest ones a head start. Guess what happens to the race then?
- tim333 1y ago
  I think your machine gun example illustrates people are quite capable of masacreing each other without AI or even high tech - in past periods sometimes over 30% of males died in warfare. While AI could get involved it's kind of a separate thing.
  - FirmwareBurner 1y ago
    Yeah, his automated gun phobia argument is dumb. Should we ban all future tech development because some people are a scared of some things that can be dangerous but useful? NO. Plus, ironically, Germany's Rheinmetall is a leader in automated anti-air guns so the people's phobia of automated guns is pointless and, at least in this case, common sense won, but in many others like nuclear energy, it lost. It seems like Germans area easy to manipulate to get them to go against their best interests, if you manage to trigger some phobias in them via propaganda. "Ohoohoh look out, it's the nuclear boogieman, now switch your economy to Russian gas instead, it's safer"
    - 1718627440 1y ago
      The switching to russian gas is bad for know, but was rational back then. The idea was to give russia leverage on europe besides war, so that they don't need war.
      - FirmwareBurner 1y ago
        >but was rational back then. Only if you're a corrupt German politician getting bribed by Russia to sell out long term national security for short term corporate profits. It was also considered a stupid idea back then by NATO powers asking Germany WTF are you doing, tying your economy to the nation we're preparing to go to war with. > The idea was to give russia leverage on europe besides war, so that they don't need war. The present day proves it was a stupid idea. "You were given the choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war." - Churchill
        1718627440 1y ago
- stainablesteel 1y ago
  you can choose to live in fear, the rest of us are embracing growth
encom 1y ago
The only thing the cookie law has accomplished for users, is pestering everyone with endless popups (full of dark patterns). WWW is pretty much unbearable to use without uBlock filtering that nonsense away. User tracking and fingerprinting has moved server side. Zero user privacy has been gained, because there's too much money to be made and the industry routed around this brain dead legislation.
- red_trumpet 1y ago
  > User tracking and fingerprinting has moved server side. This smells like a misconception of the GDPR. The GDPR is not about cookies, it is about tracking. You are not allowed to track your users without consent, even if you do not use any cookies.
  - whatevaa 1y ago
    Login is tracking, even when login is functional, not for tracking. Laws are analyzed by lawyers and they will err on side of caution, so you end up with these notices.
    - sublimefire 1y ago
      Cookies and crossdomain tracking is slightly different to a login. Login would occur on one platform and would not track you when you go on to amazon or some porn site or read infowars. But crossdomain cookies do not need auth and they are everywhere because webmasters get paid for adding them, they track you everywhere.
- sublimefire 1y ago
  Well in my case I just do not use those websites with an enormous amount of “partners” anymore. Cookie legislation was great because it now shows you how many businesses are ad based, it added a lot of transparency. It is annoying only because you want the shit for free and it carries a lot of cookies usually. All of the businesses that do not track beyond the necessary do not have that issue with the cookie banners IMO. GDPR is great for users and not too difficult to implement. All of the stuff related to it where you can ask the company what data they hold about you is also awesome.

oaiey 1y ago

But AI also carries tremendous risks, from something simple as automating warfare to something like a evil AGI. In Germany we have still traumas from automatic machine guns setup on the wall between East and West Germany. The Ukraine is fighting a drone war in the trenches with a psychological effect on soldiers comparable to WWI. Stake are enormous. Not only toward the good. There is enough science fiction written about it. Regulation and laws are necessary!

zettabomb 1y ago
I don't disagree that we need regulation, but I also think citing literal fiction isn't a good argument. We're also very, very far away from anything approaching AGI, so the idea of it becoming evil seems a bit far fetched.
- HighGoldstein 1y ago
  Autonomous sentry turrets have already been a thing since the 2000s. If we assume that military technology is always at least some 5-10 years ahead of civilian, it is likely that some if not all of the "defense" contractors have far more terrifying autonomous weapons.
- ben_w 1y ago
  I agree fiction is a bad argument. On the other hand, firstly every single person disagrees what the phrase AGI means, varying from "we've had it for years already" to "the ability to do provably impossible things like solve the halting problem"; and secondly we have a very bad track record for knowing how long it will take to invent anything in the field of AI with both positive and negative failures, for example constantly thinking that self driving cars are just around the corner vs. people saying an AI that could play Go well was "decades" away a mere few months before it beat the world champion.
- tim333 1y ago
  Did you catch the news about Grok wanting to kill the jews last week? All you need for AI or AGI to be evil is a prompt saying be evil.
- ken47 1y ago
  We don't need AGI in order for AI to destroy humanity.
chii 1y ago
regulation does not stop weapons from being created that utilizes AI. It only slows down honest states that try to abide by it, and gives the dishonest ones a head start. Guess what happens to the race then?
tim333 1y ago
I think your machine gun example illustrates people are quite capable of masacreing each other without AI or even high tech - in past periods sometimes over 30% of males died in warfare. While AI could get involved it's kind of a separate thing.
- FirmwareBurner 1y ago
  Yeah, his automated gun phobia argument is dumb. Should we ban all future tech development because some people are a scared of some things that can be dangerous but useful? NO. Plus, ironically, Germany's Rheinmetall is a leader in automated anti-air guns so the people's phobia of automated guns is pointless and, at least in this case, common sense won, but in many others like nuclear energy, it lost. It seems like Germans area easy to manipulate to get them to go against their best interests, if you manage to trigger some phobias in them via propaganda. "Ohoohoh look out, it's the nuclear boogieman, now switch your economy to Russian gas instead, it's safer"
  - 1718627440 1y ago
    The switching to russian gas is bad for know, but was rational back then. The idea was to give russia leverage on europe besides war, so that they don't need war.
    - FirmwareBurner 1y ago
      >but was rational back then. Only if you're a corrupt German politician getting bribed by Russia to sell out long term national security for short term corporate profits. It was also considered a stupid idea back then by NATO powers asking Germany WTF are you doing, tying your economy to the nation we're preparing to go to war with. > The idea was to give russia leverage on europe besides war, so that they don't need war. The present day proves it was a stupid idea. "You were given the choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war." - Churchill
      - 1718627440 1y ago
stainablesteel 1y ago
you can choose to live in fear, the rest of us are embracing growth

encom 1y ago

The only thing the cookie law has accomplished for users, is pestering everyone with endless popups (full of dark patterns). WWW is pretty much unbearable to use without uBlock filtering that nonsense away. User tracking and fingerprinting has moved server side. Zero user privacy has been gained, because there's too much money to be made and the industry routed around this brain dead legislation.

red_trumpet 1y ago
> User tracking and fingerprinting has moved server side. This smells like a misconception of the GDPR. The GDPR is not about cookies, it is about tracking. You are not allowed to track your users without consent, even if you do not use any cookies.
- whatevaa 1y ago
  Login is tracking, even when login is functional, not for tracking. Laws are analyzed by lawyers and they will err on side of caution, so you end up with these notices.
  - sublimefire 1y ago
    Cookies and crossdomain tracking is slightly different to a login. Login would occur on one platform and would not track you when you go on to amazon or some porn site or read infowars. But crossdomain cookies do not need auth and they are everywhere because webmasters get paid for adding them, they track you everywhere.
sublimefire 1y ago
Well in my case I just do not use those websites with an enormous amount of “partners” anymore. Cookie legislation was great because it now shows you how many businesses are ad based, it added a lot of transparency. It is annoying only because you want the shit for free and it carries a lot of cookies usually. All of the businesses that do not track beyond the necessary do not have that issue with the cookie banners IMO. GDPR is great for users and not too difficult to implement. All of the stuff related to it where you can ask the company what data they hold about you is also awesome.