10 ms·

[flagged]

albedoa 1y ago
Others are giving you too much benefit. Without looking it up, can you tell us who "levelsio" is? How do you think you know about him?
hopelite 1y ago
It’s about control. It is a fundamental difference in perspective and mentality regarding control. America is or at least was largely oriented around indirect control or outcome oriented objectives, where Europe is largely oriented around direct control or prescribed objectives. It’s also enshrined in our respective governments and the foundational philosophies that underpin them. The US Declaration of Independence sets out to describe that the natural rights of the men who created the USA are preeminent and the Constitution lists how those rights may not be infringed upon, i.e. It creates laws that binds and limits the actions of government, something that was and has never been emulated since. Where across Europe, you simply do not have anything even remotely similar and the law inversely describes what you are permitted by government to do instead. It is effectively descriptive vs prescriptive law and underlying philosophies. It is something I have had the hardest time on occasion getting my European friends to really internalize, seemingly because it’s so contrary to what their conditioned with all their life, i.e., the government is essentially the matter that grants you what it grants you, not that you have rights that the government may not infringe upon. But to be fair, this possibly European tendency to dominate and control what you may and may not do and when and how, is and long has been creeping into the USA too, arguably since even the 12th amendment to the Constitution and getting worse with every amendment since, layers upon layers of contradicting and conflicting flaws and bugs that will be reading their ugly heed here in about two years, when Trump may run for President again. And if you don’t think he can, you simply don’t understand what a spaghetti code the Constitution is after the 11th amendment, hack after hack building up mountains of debt that is going to come due in our lives.
- class4behavior 1y ago
  JfC, this is so confidently wrong, it's absurd.
  - hopelite 1y ago
    Odd that you confidently declare it as such without providing any argument whatsoever or basis of any kind at all.
thefz 1y ago
> Actually nuts to me the degree to which European policymakers do not even begin to understand how to kickstart technologically-intensive industry. Ah the good old "Europe can't do Silicon Valley" trope.
ainiriand 1y ago
Yeah let's start doing things like they do it in the US perhaps we can end up like them!
p0w3n3d 1y ago
[flagged]
- marcinzm 1y ago
  > EU is full of corruption Which I think many (the vast majority?) Europeans will fight you to the death to avoid admitting. The politicians just made some honest mistakes. No corruption at all. Just read the other replies in this discussion.
- bberrry 1y ago
  Do share examples and evidence, by all means.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
webdevver 1y ago
[flagged]
- whimsicalism 1y ago
  Wouldn't go that far. EU policymakers have good intentions, I believe - but ultimately are products of their environment and cultural inclination. The EU is such a bizarre place because they treat capital and entrepreneurs with such massive distrust, but never really bothered getting rid of the quasi-static entrenched hierarchies from feudalism? Like I'll go to the UK or France and there will just be massive swathes of land owned by the nobility or 'former' nobility? Maybe start there but let your high-value human capital earn a good wage?
  - panick21_ 1y ago
    The problem in UK cities has nothing to do with feudalism. The massive lands most of those big land owners own isn't really worth that much. The really valuable land around cities is locked up by 1960s land use and building regulation. You have incredibly valuable land not developed because it has to be 'green' but its not some ancient woodland, rather its just a bunch of grass next to a highway. Those 1960s regulation have a 1000x larger effect then any land owners owning a bunch of unproductive farmland or highlands. Not to say there are no issues with large land owners, but its nowhere near anywhere close to being the issue with housing prices and living cost.
  - tokai 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - whimsicalism 1y ago
      And your comment is just a totally normal way of engaging with strangers on the internet :)
      - inexcf 1y ago
        I mean, yeah, his post seems like a good faith analysis without any insults.
deaux 1y ago
> What's REALLY much more important though if you want to be a part of the AI race and I've posted for years here with @euaccofficial is to make Europe a really extremely attractive place to start and run an AI business. Remove regulatory obstructions and give tax discounts for startups. Let them build a business first that can compete worldwide and once they make enough money (let's say $100M/y), then slowly start adding regulation. When you talk to most EU business owners, even in tech, the limiting factor isn't regulations. This being the #1 reason is such a tired trope. Ironically, China has in some ways a bigger regulatory burden when it comes to software, as there if the government doesn't approve the business is dead in the water. I doubt that Klarna would've gotten off the ground there, for one, I could see them being shut down much earlier there. In the EU only now very slowly are some governments even starting to talk about some weak measures around their business model. But I've never, not once in my life, heard "Chinese software companies can't get off the ground due to the regulatory burden". The same people who clamor about the EU regulations are the ones who hate on the EU for their protectionist measures against US tech. Yet another bout of irony here - China's software industry has flourished exactly thanks to 10 times stronger protectionist measures against US tech. So has Korea's, and their protectionism has never even been anywhere on the China level, more inbetween EU and China. No, if there's anything that would help, it's much more tech protectionism in the EU. Pieter Levels is at the end of the day an influencer, not a serious founder.
- thefz 1y ago
  > The same people who clamor about the EU regulations are the ones who hate on the EU for their protectionist measures against US tech Bingo, my friend. And good old american exceptionalism taught since the first days of school.
- whimsicalism 1y ago
  > When you talk to most EU business owners, even in tech, the limiting factor isn't regulations. This being the #1 reason is such a tired trope. Okay, what is the limiting factor? Because when I talk to EU business owners (admittedly, very few) - they point to lack of big EU capital markets, which is directly downstream of the policy environment. And when I talk to top EU human capital, they all point to the lack of competitive wages. There's a real difficulty in allocating capital to talented humans. And, at least in Southern Europe, the income tax schedule is so aggressive it's hard to justify continuing working in many of these countries if you are highly talented. Like, if you can tell me what the induced operator norm from l_2 -> l_2 is - probably you should come to the US and work at a biglab and make bank. What can you do in Portugal, Italy, Spain, etc.?? > Pieter Levels is at the end of the day an influencer, not a serious founder. Sure, agreed. I think it is a complete misreading to point to protectionism as the reason for Chinese success, but having a big unified domestic market for consumers along with massive saving rates and capital controls probably does help.
dzikimarian 1y ago
While grant process in EU isn't fun, I think Levels has bit of an ego issues. He mentioned that if he had issues like that on eg X, he would see Elon himself in the replies. While he is great at converting his influencer status to income in his micro-SaaS projects, I don't think running ad-fueled browser games on state-sponsored super computer should be really aim of these grant programs.
- stingraycharles 1y ago
  Problem with these grant proposal things is that it favors established businesses over small founders. Establishes businesses have much more resources to go through all the legal / red tape issues. I’ve seen this in practice with innovation subsidies: small startup has to spend a lot of time to go though all the hoops, taking up significant resources, to get modest compensation for actual innovative work. Larger business hires an external agency to do everything for them, to make silly proposals “convert website from jquery to react” as innovation, and gets thousands upon thousands of FTE-hours in subsidy compensation hours for it.
  - jkukul 1y ago
    this! it favors established business with legal teams and (maybe more importantly) with connections. The EU is also great at creating a heavy regulatory environment. Which entrenches existing incumbents. So the EU creates barriers that favor big companies, then tries to fix it with grants that... also favor big companies. And then everyone's surprised that there's no innovation in Europe. From all the world's companies worth over 100B$ there's only one European company - SAP, founded 50 years ago. [1] [1] https://www.economist.com/briefing/2021/06/05/once-a-corporate-heavyweight-europe-is-now-an-also-ran-can-it-recover-its-footing https://www.economist.com/briefing/2021/06/05/once-a-corpora...
    - jack_tripper 1y ago
      >this! it favors established business with legal teams and (maybe more importantly) with connections. This x2. A close friend of mine works at a major EU HW tech company and his job is wearing a suit, going to dinner parties and rubbing shoulders with high level local and national bureaucrats to convince them to fund X, Y, Z projects, none of which result in any major commercial success or ROI for the governments because the money they get is not enough to make new successful products, but hey, he's loving his job which gives him amazing job security against the waves of layoffs the company went through due to falling of sales, plus the networking he gets out of that is invaluable. So at least some people are enjoying the gravy train while it lasts. But that's why a lot of EU tech companies immediately go to the US first before opening up to the EU market. US VSs are more generous with their cheque books than EU governments and investors, plus the 300 million people single consumer market speaking English as the common language and all that.
tinco 1y ago
Yeah no, it's just not how it works. They're trying to support fundamental research and they have limited resources to accomplish them. Some random dude who wants to build a company that generates pretty AI pictures is just not the target audience, and he rightly got rejected. And frankly, the dream scenario that Pieter describes where he somehow would qualify for these resources also wouldn't help kickstart the tech industry, and it's also not how it works in the states. What does help, and what European governments (at least the one in The Netherlands that Pieter is from) actually do, is more funding for startups. If you're a startup founder in NL almost every angel you talk to has a matched funding deal with the government. That's such a smart way of keeping up with the US. Do you think US startups get free compute from the government? They don't even get subsidies most of the time. What they get is better funding because there's more capital available, and helping investors with that is exactly how you solve that.
- logifail 1y ago
  > What does help, and what European governments (at least the one in The Netherlands that Pieter is from) actually do, is more funding for startups. If you're a startup founder in NL almost every angel you talk to has a matched funding deal with the government. That's such a smart way of keeping up with the US. Does government offering matched funding to investors actually help startups who are struggling to find (any) funding? If a startup can't find (any) funding, matching is irrelevant. > Do you think US startups get free compute from the government? They don't even get subsidies most of the time. What they get is better funding because there's more capital available, and helping investors with that is exactly how you solve that. Umm. I'm not really convinced that the political elites in Europe understand how to do any of this stuff well. See also: https://www.eib.org/en/publications/online/all/the-scale-up-gap https://www.eib.org/en/publications/online/all/the-scale-up-...
- whimsicalism 1y ago
  I don't think what you're saying is inconsistent with what I'm saying. I think you are making a big deal out of the difference between state investment funds and subsidized GPUs but I think they basically work by similar mechanisms.
softwaredoug 1y ago
Is the point of these policies to pick winners? Or to upskill the creators and stimulate the economy by giving possible entrepreneurs experience Europeans can't get in big tech? In the US, some ex-Googler might found a startup. Europe doesn't have the equivalent of FAANG. (Europe-wide companies are not quite as easy as US-wide) Even if the super computer itself "fails", is the goal actually the secondary impacts to the economy? (And in the US, we do our own fair share of picking winners / losers, especially in the current regime)
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
troupo 1y ago
Levels is engagement farming. Instead of uncritically reposting him you could've gone ahead and read what the cluster is for: https://x.com/dmitriid/status/1982927767286231403 https://x.com/dmitriid/status/1982927767286231403 Cluster: for public benefit, cutting edge research in biotech, medical, robotics. Levels: I want to create AI photos of people for my AI Slop startup
- whimsicalism 1y ago
  > Cluster: for public benefit, cutting edge research in biotech, medical, robotics. That's not what the quoted paragraph says and you can read the whole release if you want: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_2299 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_...
  - troupo 1y ago
    I literally quoted the paragraph from this link in the tweet I provided: Edit: lol, I didn't, I quoted it from a policy document, not from press release. However, my point stands: --- start quote --- Apply AI Strategy The Apply AI Strategy aims to harness AI's transformative potential by driving adoption of AI across strategic and public sectors including healthcare, pharmaceuticals, energy, mobility, manufacturing, construction, agri-food, defence, communications and culture. It will also support small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) with their specific needs and help Industries integrate AI into their operations. --- end quote --- I also quoted a paragraph from a document I will find when I'm not on mobile. Levels literally wants to train AI Slop: https://x.com/levelsio/status/1981499900266193028 https://x.com/levelsio/status/1981499900266193028 --- start quote --- Train a foundational model for AI photos of people --- end quote ---
    - IshKebab 1y ago
      Seems like your quote was very misleading to me, so no your point doesn't stand.
      - 1y ago
antman 1y ago
What are the effects of pick the winner strategy? Sounds intriguing
saubeidl 1y ago
[flagged]
- cbeach 1y ago
  The EU Commission is appointed, not elected. Only the Parliament (MEPs) are elected. What’s worse, the parliament cannot originate law. Only the unelected Commission can do so. And they can do it behind closed doors. This is a setup that’s ripe for corruption.
  - vanviegen 1y ago
    It's true that they are appointed. However, they're appointed by the EU Council (the heads of state, most of them elected, some appointed by a national parliament), and approved by the (elected) European Parliament. At the cost of some transparency, this does make it possible to select a bit more for management skills instead of just campaigning skills.
    - throwaway_dang 1y ago
      [flagged]
      - saubeidl 1y ago
        Trump was appointed as well by that standard. But nobody says that, that's my point. It's a double standard designed to spread FUD.
      - vanviegen 1y ago
        If Elon was explicitly affirmed by a majority of congres, then that would have been similar, yes.
  - saubeidl 1y ago
    The Commission is appointed by elected officials. That's the same way the US presidency works. It's also how the UK PM role works, or any minister in pretty much any democratic government. All of those are still referred to as "elected" in common tongue.
tomhow 1y ago
Please don't fulminate on HN. A sentence like "Actually nuts to me the degree to which European policymakers do not even begin to understand" is inflammatory rhetoric of the kind we're trying to avoid here on HN. The question of how countries/economic unions can funtion most effectively is a topic worthy of serious discussion, but these discussions can be far more fruitful it they're approached with curiosity rather than rage.

[flagged]

Others are giving you too much benefit. Without looking it up, can you tell us who "levelsio" is? How do you think you know about him?

hopelite 1y ago

It’s about control. It is a fundamental difference in perspective and mentality regarding control. America is or at least was largely oriented around indirect control or outcome oriented objectives, where Europe is largely oriented around direct control or prescribed objectives. It’s also enshrined in our respective governments and the foundational philosophies that underpin them. The US Declaration of Independence sets out to describe that the natural rights of the men who created the USA are preeminent and the Constitution lists how those rights may not be infringed upon, i.e. It creates laws that binds and limits the actions of government, something that was and has never been emulated since. Where across Europe, you simply do not have anything even remotely similar and the law inversely describes what you are permitted by government to do instead. It is effectively descriptive vs prescriptive law and underlying philosophies. It is something I have had the hardest time on occasion getting my European friends to really internalize, seemingly because it’s so contrary to what their conditioned with all their life, i.e., the government is essentially the matter that grants you what it grants you, not that you have rights that the government may not infringe upon. But to be fair, this possibly European tendency to dominate and control what you may and may not do and when and how, is and long has been creeping into the USA too, arguably since even the 12th amendment to the Constitution and getting worse with every amendment since, layers upon layers of contradicting and conflicting flaws and bugs that will be reading their ugly heed here in about two years, when Trump may run for President again. And if you don’t think he can, you simply don’t understand what a spaghetti code the Constitution is after the 11th amendment, hack after hack building up mountains of debt that is going to come due in our lives.

class4behavior 1y ago
JfC, this is so confidently wrong, it's absurd.
- hopelite 1y ago
  Odd that you confidently declare it as such without providing any argument whatsoever or basis of any kind at all.

thefz 1y ago

> Actually nuts to me the degree to which European policymakers do not even begin to understand how to kickstart technologically-intensive industry. Ah the good old "Europe can't do Silicon Valley" trope.

ainiriand 1y ago

Yeah let's start doing things like they do it in the US perhaps we can end up like them!

p0w3n3d 1y ago

[flagged]

marcinzm 1y ago
> EU is full of corruption Which I think many (the vast majority?) Europeans will fight you to the death to avoid admitting. The politicians just made some honest mistakes. No corruption at all. Just read the other replies in this discussion.
bberrry 1y ago
Do share examples and evidence, by all means.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]

webdevver 1y ago

[flagged]

whimsicalism 1y ago
Wouldn't go that far. EU policymakers have good intentions, I believe - but ultimately are products of their environment and cultural inclination. The EU is such a bizarre place because they treat capital and entrepreneurs with such massive distrust, but never really bothered getting rid of the quasi-static entrenched hierarchies from feudalism? Like I'll go to the UK or France and there will just be massive swathes of land owned by the nobility or 'former' nobility? Maybe start there but let your high-value human capital earn a good wage?
- panick21_ 1y ago
  The problem in UK cities has nothing to do with feudalism. The massive lands most of those big land owners own isn't really worth that much. The really valuable land around cities is locked up by 1960s land use and building regulation. You have incredibly valuable land not developed because it has to be 'green' but its not some ancient woodland, rather its just a bunch of grass next to a highway. Those 1960s regulation have a 1000x larger effect then any land owners owning a bunch of unproductive farmland or highlands. Not to say there are no issues with large land owners, but its nowhere near anywhere close to being the issue with housing prices and living cost.
- tokai 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - whimsicalism 1y ago
    And your comment is just a totally normal way of engaging with strangers on the internet :)
    - inexcf 1y ago
      I mean, yeah, his post seems like a good faith analysis without any insults.

deaux 1y ago

> What's REALLY much more important though if you want to be a part of the AI race and I've posted for years here with @euaccofficial is to make Europe a really extremely attractive place to start and run an AI business. Remove regulatory obstructions and give tax discounts for startups. Let them build a business first that can compete worldwide and once they make enough money (let's say $100M/y), then slowly start adding regulation. When you talk to most EU business owners, even in tech, the limiting factor isn't regulations. This being the #1 reason is such a tired trope. Ironically, China has in some ways a bigger regulatory burden when it comes to software, as there if the government doesn't approve the business is dead in the water. I doubt that Klarna would've gotten off the ground there, for one, I could see them being shut down much earlier there. In the EU only now very slowly are some governments even starting to talk about some weak measures around their business model. But I've never, not once in my life, heard "Chinese software companies can't get off the ground due to the regulatory burden". The same people who clamor about the EU regulations are the ones who hate on the EU for their protectionist measures against US tech. Yet another bout of irony here - China's software industry has flourished exactly thanks to 10 times stronger protectionist measures against US tech. So has Korea's, and their protectionism has never even been anywhere on the China level, more inbetween EU and China. No, if there's anything that would help, it's much more tech protectionism in the EU. Pieter Levels is at the end of the day an influencer, not a serious founder.

thefz 1y ago
> The same people who clamor about the EU regulations are the ones who hate on the EU for their protectionist measures against US tech Bingo, my friend. And good old american exceptionalism taught since the first days of school.
whimsicalism 1y ago
> When you talk to most EU business owners, even in tech, the limiting factor isn't regulations. This being the #1 reason is such a tired trope. Okay, what is the limiting factor? Because when I talk to EU business owners (admittedly, very few) - they point to lack of big EU capital markets, which is directly downstream of the policy environment. And when I talk to top EU human capital, they all point to the lack of competitive wages. There's a real difficulty in allocating capital to talented humans. And, at least in Southern Europe, the income tax schedule is so aggressive it's hard to justify continuing working in many of these countries if you are highly talented. Like, if you can tell me what the induced operator norm from l_2 -> l_2 is - probably you should come to the US and work at a biglab and make bank. What can you do in Portugal, Italy, Spain, etc.?? > Pieter Levels is at the end of the day an influencer, not a serious founder. Sure, agreed. I think it is a complete misreading to point to protectionism as the reason for Chinese success, but having a big unified domestic market for consumers along with massive saving rates and capital controls probably does help.

dzikimarian 1y ago

While grant process in EU isn't fun, I think Levels has bit of an ego issues. He mentioned that if he had issues like that on eg X, he would see Elon himself in the replies. While he is great at converting his influencer status to income in his micro-SaaS projects, I don't think running ad-fueled browser games on state-sponsored super computer should be really aim of these grant programs.

stingraycharles 1y ago
Problem with these grant proposal things is that it favors established businesses over small founders. Establishes businesses have much more resources to go through all the legal / red tape issues. I’ve seen this in practice with innovation subsidies: small startup has to spend a lot of time to go though all the hoops, taking up significant resources, to get modest compensation for actual innovative work. Larger business hires an external agency to do everything for them, to make silly proposals “convert website from jquery to react” as innovation, and gets thousands upon thousands of FTE-hours in subsidy compensation hours for it.
- jkukul 1y ago
  this! it favors established business with legal teams and (maybe more importantly) with connections. The EU is also great at creating a heavy regulatory environment. Which entrenches existing incumbents. So the EU creates barriers that favor big companies, then tries to fix it with grants that... also favor big companies. And then everyone's surprised that there's no innovation in Europe. From all the world's companies worth over 100B$ there's only one European company - SAP, founded 50 years ago. [1] [1] https://www.economist.com/briefing/2021/06/05/once-a-corporate-heavyweight-europe-is-now-an-also-ran-can-it-recover-its-footing https://www.economist.com/briefing/2021/06/05/once-a-corpora...
  - jack_tripper 1y ago
    >this! it favors established business with legal teams and (maybe more importantly) with connections. This x2. A close friend of mine works at a major EU HW tech company and his job is wearing a suit, going to dinner parties and rubbing shoulders with high level local and national bureaucrats to convince them to fund X, Y, Z projects, none of which result in any major commercial success or ROI for the governments because the money they get is not enough to make new successful products, but hey, he's loving his job which gives him amazing job security against the waves of layoffs the company went through due to falling of sales, plus the networking he gets out of that is invaluable. So at least some people are enjoying the gravy train while it lasts. But that's why a lot of EU tech companies immediately go to the US first before opening up to the EU market. US VSs are more generous with their cheque books than EU governments and investors, plus the 300 million people single consumer market speaking English as the common language and all that.

tinco 1y ago

Yeah no, it's just not how it works. They're trying to support fundamental research and they have limited resources to accomplish them. Some random dude who wants to build a company that generates pretty AI pictures is just not the target audience, and he rightly got rejected. And frankly, the dream scenario that Pieter describes where he somehow would qualify for these resources also wouldn't help kickstart the tech industry, and it's also not how it works in the states. What does help, and what European governments (at least the one in The Netherlands that Pieter is from) actually do, is more funding for startups. If you're a startup founder in NL almost every angel you talk to has a matched funding deal with the government. That's such a smart way of keeping up with the US. Do you think US startups get free compute from the government? They don't even get subsidies most of the time. What they get is better funding because there's more capital available, and helping investors with that is exactly how you solve that.

logifail 1y ago
> What does help, and what European governments (at least the one in The Netherlands that Pieter is from) actually do, is more funding for startups. If you're a startup founder in NL almost every angel you talk to has a matched funding deal with the government. That's such a smart way of keeping up with the US. Does government offering matched funding to investors actually help startups who are struggling to find (any) funding? If a startup can't find (any) funding, matching is irrelevant. > Do you think US startups get free compute from the government? They don't even get subsidies most of the time. What they get is better funding because there's more capital available, and helping investors with that is exactly how you solve that. Umm. I'm not really convinced that the political elites in Europe understand how to do any of this stuff well. See also: https://www.eib.org/en/publications/online/all/the-scale-up-gap https://www.eib.org/en/publications/online/all/the-scale-up-...
whimsicalism 1y ago
I don't think what you're saying is inconsistent with what I'm saying. I think you are making a big deal out of the difference between state investment funds and subsidized GPUs but I think they basically work by similar mechanisms.

softwaredoug 1y ago

Is the point of these policies to pick winners? Or to upskill the creators and stimulate the economy by giving possible entrepreneurs experience Europeans can't get in big tech? In the US, some ex-Googler might found a startup. Europe doesn't have the equivalent of FAANG. (Europe-wide companies are not quite as easy as US-wide) Even if the super computer itself "fails", is the goal actually the secondary impacts to the economy? (And in the US, we do our own fair share of picking winners / losers, especially in the current regime)

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

troupo 1y ago

Levels is engagement farming. Instead of uncritically reposting him you could've gone ahead and read what the cluster is for: https://x.com/dmitriid/status/1982927767286231403 https://x.com/dmitriid/status/1982927767286231403 Cluster: for public benefit, cutting edge research in biotech, medical, robotics. Levels: I want to create AI photos of people for my AI Slop startup

whimsicalism 1y ago
> Cluster: for public benefit, cutting edge research in biotech, medical, robotics. That's not what the quoted paragraph says and you can read the whole release if you want: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_2299 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_...
- troupo 1y ago
  I literally quoted the paragraph from this link in the tweet I provided: Edit: lol, I didn't, I quoted it from a policy document, not from press release. However, my point stands: --- start quote --- Apply AI Strategy The Apply AI Strategy aims to harness AI's transformative potential by driving adoption of AI across strategic and public sectors including healthcare, pharmaceuticals, energy, mobility, manufacturing, construction, agri-food, defence, communications and culture. It will also support small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) with their specific needs and help Industries integrate AI into their operations. --- end quote --- I also quoted a paragraph from a document I will find when I'm not on mobile. Levels literally wants to train AI Slop: https://x.com/levelsio/status/1981499900266193028 https://x.com/levelsio/status/1981499900266193028 --- start quote --- Train a foundational model for AI photos of people --- end quote ---
  - IshKebab 1y ago
    Seems like your quote was very misleading to me, so no your point doesn't stand.
    - 1y ago

antman 1y ago

What are the effects of pick the winner strategy? Sounds intriguing

saubeidl 1y ago

[flagged]

cbeach 1y ago
The EU Commission is appointed, not elected. Only the Parliament (MEPs) are elected. What’s worse, the parliament cannot originate law. Only the unelected Commission can do so. And they can do it behind closed doors. This is a setup that’s ripe for corruption.
- vanviegen 1y ago
  It's true that they are appointed. However, they're appointed by the EU Council (the heads of state, most of them elected, some appointed by a national parliament), and approved by the (elected) European Parliament. At the cost of some transparency, this does make it possible to select a bit more for management skills instead of just campaigning skills.
  - throwaway_dang 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - saubeidl 1y ago
      Trump was appointed as well by that standard. But nobody says that, that's my point. It's a double standard designed to spread FUD.
    - vanviegen 1y ago
      If Elon was explicitly affirmed by a majority of congres, then that would have been similar, yes.
- saubeidl 1y ago
  The Commission is appointed by elected officials. That's the same way the US presidency works. It's also how the UK PM role works, or any minister in pretty much any democratic government. All of those are still referred to as "elected" in common tongue.

tomhow 1y ago

Please don't fulminate on HN. A sentence like "Actually nuts to me the degree to which European policymakers do not even begin to understand" is inflammatory rhetoric of the kind we're trying to avoid here on HN. The question of how countries/economic unions can funtion most effectively is a topic worthy of serious discussion, but these discussions can be far more fruitful it they're approached with curiosity rather than rage.