8 ms·

European Commission plans “digital omnibus” package to simplify its tech laws

93 points by purpleKiwi 11mo ago

jmholla 11mo ago
Original title: Brussels knifes privacy to feed the AI boom
- spwa4 11mo ago
  Why do you doubt that is exactly what is happening? The EU governments are demanding to view all communications by it's citizens AND has given itself the right to use all sorts of AI technology (like facial recognition) on private data (like faces for example). Privacy protection, even for your medical records, only exists against private companies. Which means that the people you want privacy from, your medical insurance, which is part of the government nearly everywhere in Europe, both has access and can do with the data whatever it wants under EU legislation. Does anyone seriously expect EU legislation will protect people from the obvious: training AI on chat messages and then using violence (ie. police action) just based on online messages? Oh right. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/policing-speech-online-germany-60-minutes-transcript/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/policing-speech-online-germany-...
  - jmholla 11mo ago
    > Why do you doubt that is exactly what is happening? I don't. I was just letting people know the title here was different than the source.
rckt 11mo ago
How about also reviewing the copyright laws in favour of the public? The AI actors consume everything for profit and nobody cares. But if an ordinary Joe does this for personal amusement, he should face consequences. This whole thing is obviously biased, because of money.
impossiblefork 11mo ago
It's really stupid that people imagine that the GDPR would hold back European AI. Seeing as the Americans firms have in fact rolled out their systems, it's unlikely to be a legal problem withe GDPR. Maybe copyright is a problem.That would have been a solved problem if that regulation requiring people to list their training data had been applied fully. This won't make any difference for AI and will reduce EU cohesion, as a belief in privacy is a shared European value.
- nuffisnuff9 11mo ago
  Shared European value is a ridiculous concept go outside and you will see people share almost nothing in common. It's ridiculous to pretend all people in europe agree on this matter, but nobody outside europe doing it.
  - impossiblefork 11mo ago
    But we do in fact have this as a shared value. I'm sure there are people outside it whole like it too, sort of like how there are people outside Sweden who like freedom-to-roam, but when you actually have something it becomes part of your expectations and your culture; and I think this belief in limits on internet surveillance, tracking, etc. has in fact become such a thing. When you don't have something most people accept not having it and it becomes normal not to have it, and I think that's the case with privacy in the US and outside the EU in general.
Insanity 11mo ago
It's a tricky balance to strike. I don't want EU to fall behind further in the AI race, and I do want them to be more competitive in the tech landscape. At the moment, EU really isn't competitive in tech (and neither in tech salaries) and it leads to a certain amount of 'brain drain' as people move abroad. So while I do understand the need for regulations, they shouldn't regulate themselves into irrelevance. I don't think there's an easy solution to this.
- deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]
- mjburgess 11mo ago
  But what is 'tech'? When we say the EU isn't competitive in 'tech', what technology capacity do they lack? I think 'tech' as a category doesnt make much sense any more. It's like saying 'road-based business'. Most companies are 'tech' companies. Ignoring the technical element, what are US megacorps that account for all the GDP growth of the last while? Mostly ad market monopolies, then mostly massive-scale IP theft, etc. I think the EU is 'behind' the US only in it's inability to be well-positioned to build massive rent-seeking megacorps. I dont see where-else this gap is supposed to be. What, on 'tech' should the EU be doing differently? Just allowing megacorps to add 30% to every transaction? If this US tech bubble bursts, it's not clear that the EU won't be better positioned to pick up the pieces.
  - whimsicalism 11mo ago
    > Mostly ad market monopolies, then mostly massive-scale IP theft, etc. Good point. I think that the EU has an opportunity to really grow here by focusing on intellectual property enforcement, patents, copyright, and generally more strict enforcement on making sure returns for ideas go to the first person to think of them. The EU already has a pretty strong governance lead and should double down on where its strengths lie.
    - immibis 11mo ago
      Definitely! Preventing as much innovation as possible is always good for an economy.
Yaina 11mo ago
I like the EU, but what's annoying about things like this, or the Chat Control law that keeps getting pushed, is that civil society and privacy advocacy groups always need to stay vigilant and keep mobilizing people. It's an attrition game. I wonder what harm companies are even claiming. But honestly makes perfect sense that Germany's current conservative government is in favor of it. Giant GDP boosts are always just one deregulation away, hm?
- w1nt3rmut3 11mo ago
  What do you mean abroad? I don't think anyone is considering moving to the USA. But maybe you mean a different country?
  - Yaina 11mo ago
    I think you replied to the wrong thread ^^;
    - wizzwizz4 11mo ago
      I think it was meant to be https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45880024 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45880024.
  - admissionsguy 11mo ago
    I actually see a large stream of people moving to the US. Europe is doomed.
    - wkat4242 11mo ago
      I see the opposite. A lot of US people trying to move here now that it's becoming unliveable there for eg trans people. I'm kinda in an lgbt bubble but still. I myself have informed my employer I will no longer even travel to the US for work. Visiting a country means subjecting yourself to its laws and I won't do that. Same with eg middle east. I'm kinda non-binary so trying to get an X passport now so I have an easier time refusing (as I wouldn't be accepted entry anyway) Also for colleagues in India, scoring a job in America through our company was always the big ideal. That also is no more because nobody wants to be a second class citizen.
BrenBarn 11mo ago
I'm always boggled by the logic of thinking that somehow having big companies going around doing harmful actions to people is "good for the economy" or "keeps us competitive". If having strict AI regulations means AI companies leave Europe, that's good! I wish we could do the same and get them to leave the US. These big AI companies are bad. We shouldn't want them, we shouldn't try to attract them, we shouldn't provide any conciliations or incentives. The sooner and more completely they're eradicated from any jurisdiction, the better. Forcing that kind of toxic waste out of your country should be perceived as a win.
- rapsey 11mo ago
  What harmful actions?
  - Muromec 11mo ago
    Tech layoffs and electricity price increases are pretty harmful even if legal and non-violent.
  - BrenBarn 11mo ago
    Theft of creative work, brain rot, intrusive enshittifiying of all manner of software, spreading misinformation, perpetuating biases, concentrating wealth, sucking up energy. . . I could go on and on and on. The list of negative effects is endless.
jnurmine 11mo ago
"Draft changes would create new exceptions for AI companies that would allow them to legally process special categories of data (like a person’s religious or political beliefs, ethnicity or health data) to train and operate their tech." Fully anonymized health data I can somehow understand, but what kind of AI needs to be trained with "a person's religious or political beliefs [or] ethnicity", anonymized or not?
- DocTomoe 11mo ago
  Ethnicity can correlate with certain genetic or health predispositions - for instance, the U.S. has long recognized that some conditions (like sickle-cell anemia or hypertension) appear more frequently in Black populations. If AI systems were forbidden from even considering such demographic factors, diagnostic accuracy could suffer.
- Muromec 11mo ago
  >but what kind of AI needs to be trained with "a person's religious or political beliefs [or] ethnicity", anonymized or not? It's a category thing. There is personal data and then there is sensitive personal data, which is the enumerated list you quoted. Snarky non-answer reply is of course -- the kind of ШІ that makes autistic roman salutes and accelerates from 0 to 1933.
- port11 11mo ago
  These categories of data are already somewhat special under the GDPR. I think we've committed enough genocide that now they're enshrined into protected data types.
- zrn900 11mo ago
  > but what kind of AI needs to be trained with "a person's religious or political beliefs [or] ethnicity" Propaganda AI. The EU openly declared that it will create a ministry of truth. Officially called 'fighting disinformation' of course.
nuffisnuff9 11mo ago
Hopefully it's the end of GDPR and privacy laws that absolutely no one requested. Like nobody requested that encrypted chats stop being encrypted or that X becomes a censorship target of EU comissars
- seydor 11mo ago
  More like the continuation with more complex regulation and exceptions.
- wkat4242 11mo ago
  Eh wait I requested them and I'm still very much in favour of them. Having the right to privacy is a big one. With chat control yes, that was totally evil. But I consider GDPR and DSA/DMA forces of good. The idea that there's no mandate for these things is not true.
paganel 11mo ago
[flagged]
- rapsey 11mo ago
  Unfortunately the downfall of the EU will not be easy or quick.
  - paganel 11mo ago
    I agree it won't be easy. About quick, they were saying the same thing about the Soviets up until 1989.
  - DocTomoe 11mo ago
    Germany's right-wing AfD is on a trajectory to become the largest party. One of their goals: a Dexit. An EU without the main net payer will disintegrate within months.
    - cbg0 11mo ago
      Brexit worked out so well that it basically quelled any dreams of other EU countries exiting after seeing it just creates a lot of headaches and almost no benefit to then just go back to having trade agreements with the EU while not being part of it.
      - reliabilityguy 11mo ago
        This is true until there is more countries that leave. At some point Rome fell.
      - DocTomoe 11mo ago
        There is very little benefit in EU trade agreements if there is no more EU.
  - 0manrho 11mo ago
    Don't underestimate the ability of humans to make a right mess of things in short order. Often, these elaborate systems of government, finance, and/or corporation often falls very slowly and then suddenly all at once. It's not a given by any means, nor do I wish downfall of the EU or it's member states for the record, but things are rarely as stable or persistent as they seem, especially when subjected to the novel and/or unforseen.
cadamsdotcom 11mo ago
Biggest problem is you need two types economy at once. You need the big paradigm shifts that come from an innovation economy; for that, capital must flow easily, risk-taking (both companies and individuals) be rewarded not punished, and a stable job is kind of a bad thing (people get too comfortable).. Meanwhile in more mature sectors, job security (so people can have mortgages and families) and market stability should be fostered and corporate overreach & power be checked. Advanced economies are a mix of sectors which need almost opposite policy.
- whimsicalism 11mo ago
  Unemployment insurance and redistribution is a much better solution than keeping people in jobs that have been obviated decades ago.
- miohtama 11mo ago
  No one can call software and AI mature, they are still innovating. We do not even know how they will look in give years. Premature regulation kills this innovation. Harms of AI are not the same as harms from traffic accidents.
  - cadamsdotcom 11mo ago
    That’s true - but social media is a different kettle of fish. The problem is it all gets lumped under “technology”.
sunshine-o 11mo ago
I was there during the 2010s and here is what happened: - I have been at a lot of public debates/consultations in Brussels on the GDPR as early as 2012. I have seen first EU people there screaming at US/BigTech lobby groups trying to influence the debate in their favor. - When we started to understand what the regulation would look like everybody started to panic about what it would cost to comply in the public and private sector. Everybody started to appoint a Chief Data Office or Chief Data Protection Officer. Consultancy firms were hired everywhere. - At the same time "The Cloud" was starting to creep up in those organizations, first as what we were calling "shadow IT". But the decisions maker didn't wanted to hear about "The Cloud" or loosing control of their infrastructure. - After usually a year of study on the GDPR issue the decision makers were told that: 1/ Our infrastructure and software stack will need deep work to comply and it is gonna cost a fortune. 2/ The business is asking for agility and is already using the cloud. 3/ Look Google, AWS and Azure have a "GDPR compliant" certificate from EY (the same firm who is usually hired for compliance study and work). - So I have seen dozens and dozens of organizations deciding their migration to the cloud between 2016 and 2019. Then of course COVID and homeworking came and it accelerated everything. So GDPR pushed everybody to hyperscalers ironically, because Big Tech is playing chess and know how decisions are made and how to work the system. Also I have never seen a big company centering or even using a Hertzner, OVH or Scaleway. What is probably going on is Big Tech went back to the Commission and explained the new legislation they have to pass. And my guess is it is not gonna help any EU based AI company stay competitive or get any significant market share. The EU will give them pennies to compete with OpenAI and Google and tell them that Europeans are smarter than Americans so David should be able to beat Goliath. Also the EU AI models have to be trained on renewable energy or whatever. Washington is rotten but Brussels is about the same (or worst).
ramblerman 11mo ago
This new package is about "removing regulation", specifically GDPR. Which let's be honest has not achieved its intended target. Google/Apple/etc can easily afford to break GDPR and get caught up in fines while as a small business owner it was a huge and complicated liability. ofc politico will frame this as a negative, it seems their only mission is to make moloch grow.
- lbreakjai 11mo ago
  It's not an accident. It's a very effective regulatory capture.
mmooss 11mo ago
@dang: The headline currently is Brussels knifes privacy to feed the AI boom That's inflammatory, but the current OP is inaccurate.
- gnabgib 11mo ago
  The current title is FTA, check out paragraph 2. Chosen by the OP or mods not to be inflammatory.
deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]
port11 11mo ago
I see the same type of comments when it comes to any post on EU tech. What I've found throughout my career is that: 1) Maybe we (EU citizens) are just way less interested in hustle culture compared to other regions. We can keep complaining about regulation and the difficulty of incorporating, but these feel like excuses. Estonia and Portugal come to mind as places where incorporating is practical but not a game-changer. Let's face it: we're just not as interested in launching stuff? We have cushy jobs, with lots of benefits, and launching a business is less required to lead a good life (i.e. we have less inequality ti push against). 2) I've started a company in Belgium of all places. Having worked in Germany for a long time: hey German buddies, it's not the difficulty of starting a business. It's much better over there. Also: deregulating the labor market more would place the majority of us at the mercy of companies a la USA. No, thanks. 3) We're not behind on tech because of the GDPR. Many things in this omnibus are just plain stupid. We should stimulate deeper tech, fundamental research, supporting all the open-source developers we have, and perhaps invest in European structural alternatives. Promote AI? Give me a break. 4) I'm a certified GDPR whatever (2 online courses). It's really not that much of a problem. If you know what data you're collecting and why, your Privacy Policy writes itself. Otherwise you use one of the services that does it for you. 5) Do we have a problem with tech salaries more than a generalised issue with rampant inflation? Because I've never had a single colleague or acquaintance move to the US because of a better salary. Not a single one. On the other hand we're in a parenting group that's full of people that came here to start a family due to the benefits we have. Improving things overall would fight any brain drain more than stimulating tech unicorns. 6) Speaking of which… I'd like to find again the study on the economic tissue of countries. It showed that it's SMEs that employ the most people and pay the bulk of the taxes. Good, decent, boring businesses. We could do less with the nonsensical fantasy of the startup unicorn as a paradigm of entrepreneurship. Okay, I'm sore from having my equity stolen at the last gig, but my point stands. Our parents and grandparents just went to business if they had to. Heck, with the current lack of jobs, many of us will do the same. Let's not pretend that we're missing a startup scene. Berlin was a great place for startups and I can't name a single of the places I've worked that is consequential to anything. Maybe Delivery Hero? But not even that one, they barely made a profit at the time. Honestly, let's stop whining so much and get yet another sector given the neoliberal deregulation treatment. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but posts complaining about EU regulations at this point feel like karma farming.

93 points by purpleKiwi 11mo ago

jmholla 11mo ago

Original title: Brussels knifes privacy to feed the AI boom

spwa4 11mo ago
Why do you doubt that is exactly what is happening? The EU governments are demanding to view all communications by it's citizens AND has given itself the right to use all sorts of AI technology (like facial recognition) on private data (like faces for example). Privacy protection, even for your medical records, only exists against private companies. Which means that the people you want privacy from, your medical insurance, which is part of the government nearly everywhere in Europe, both has access and can do with the data whatever it wants under EU legislation. Does anyone seriously expect EU legislation will protect people from the obvious: training AI on chat messages and then using violence (ie. police action) just based on online messages? Oh right. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/policing-speech-online-germany-60-minutes-transcript/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/policing-speech-online-germany-...
- jmholla 11mo ago
  > Why do you doubt that is exactly what is happening? I don't. I was just letting people know the title here was different than the source.

rckt 11mo ago

How about also reviewing the copyright laws in favour of the public? The AI actors consume everything for profit and nobody cares. But if an ordinary Joe does this for personal amusement, he should face consequences. This whole thing is obviously biased, because of money.

impossiblefork 11mo ago

It's really stupid that people imagine that the GDPR would hold back European AI. Seeing as the Americans firms have in fact rolled out their systems, it's unlikely to be a legal problem withe GDPR. Maybe copyright is a problem.That would have been a solved problem if that regulation requiring people to list their training data had been applied fully. This won't make any difference for AI and will reduce EU cohesion, as a belief in privacy is a shared European value.

nuffisnuff9 11mo ago
Shared European value is a ridiculous concept go outside and you will see people share almost nothing in common. It's ridiculous to pretend all people in europe agree on this matter, but nobody outside europe doing it.
- impossiblefork 11mo ago
  But we do in fact have this as a shared value. I'm sure there are people outside it whole like it too, sort of like how there are people outside Sweden who like freedom-to-roam, but when you actually have something it becomes part of your expectations and your culture; and I think this belief in limits on internet surveillance, tracking, etc. has in fact become such a thing. When you don't have something most people accept not having it and it becomes normal not to have it, and I think that's the case with privacy in the US and outside the EU in general.

Insanity 11mo ago

It's a tricky balance to strike. I don't want EU to fall behind further in the AI race, and I do want them to be more competitive in the tech landscape. At the moment, EU really isn't competitive in tech (and neither in tech salaries) and it leads to a certain amount of 'brain drain' as people move abroad. So while I do understand the need for regulations, they shouldn't regulate themselves into irrelevance. I don't think there's an easy solution to this.

deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]
mjburgess 11mo ago
But what is 'tech'? When we say the EU isn't competitive in 'tech', what technology capacity do they lack? I think 'tech' as a category doesnt make much sense any more. It's like saying 'road-based business'. Most companies are 'tech' companies. Ignoring the technical element, what are US megacorps that account for all the GDP growth of the last while? Mostly ad market monopolies, then mostly massive-scale IP theft, etc. I think the EU is 'behind' the US only in it's inability to be well-positioned to build massive rent-seeking megacorps. I dont see where-else this gap is supposed to be. What, on 'tech' should the EU be doing differently? Just allowing megacorps to add 30% to every transaction? If this US tech bubble bursts, it's not clear that the EU won't be better positioned to pick up the pieces.
- whimsicalism 11mo ago
  > Mostly ad market monopolies, then mostly massive-scale IP theft, etc. Good point. I think that the EU has an opportunity to really grow here by focusing on intellectual property enforcement, patents, copyright, and generally more strict enforcement on making sure returns for ideas go to the first person to think of them. The EU already has a pretty strong governance lead and should double down on where its strengths lie.
  - immibis 11mo ago
    Definitely! Preventing as much innovation as possible is always good for an economy.

Yaina 11mo ago

I like the EU, but what's annoying about things like this, or the Chat Control law that keeps getting pushed, is that civil society and privacy advocacy groups always need to stay vigilant and keep mobilizing people. It's an attrition game. I wonder what harm companies are even claiming. But honestly makes perfect sense that Germany's current conservative government is in favor of it. Giant GDP boosts are always just one deregulation away, hm?

w1nt3rmut3 11mo ago
What do you mean abroad? I don't think anyone is considering moving to the USA. But maybe you mean a different country?
- Yaina 11mo ago
  I think you replied to the wrong thread ^^;
  - wizzwizz4 11mo ago
    I think it was meant to be https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45880024 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45880024.
- admissionsguy 11mo ago
  I actually see a large stream of people moving to the US. Europe is doomed.
  - wkat4242 11mo ago
    I see the opposite. A lot of US people trying to move here now that it's becoming unliveable there for eg trans people. I'm kinda in an lgbt bubble but still. I myself have informed my employer I will no longer even travel to the US for work. Visiting a country means subjecting yourself to its laws and I won't do that. Same with eg middle east. I'm kinda non-binary so trying to get an X passport now so I have an easier time refusing (as I wouldn't be accepted entry anyway) Also for colleagues in India, scoring a job in America through our company was always the big ideal. That also is no more because nobody wants to be a second class citizen.

BrenBarn 11mo ago

I'm always boggled by the logic of thinking that somehow having big companies going around doing harmful actions to people is "good for the economy" or "keeps us competitive". If having strict AI regulations means AI companies leave Europe, that's good! I wish we could do the same and get them to leave the US. These big AI companies are bad. We shouldn't want them, we shouldn't try to attract them, we shouldn't provide any conciliations or incentives. The sooner and more completely they're eradicated from any jurisdiction, the better. Forcing that kind of toxic waste out of your country should be perceived as a win.

rapsey 11mo ago
What harmful actions?
- Muromec 11mo ago
  Tech layoffs and electricity price increases are pretty harmful even if legal and non-violent.
- BrenBarn 11mo ago
  Theft of creative work, brain rot, intrusive enshittifiying of all manner of software, spreading misinformation, perpetuating biases, concentrating wealth, sucking up energy. . . I could go on and on and on. The list of negative effects is endless.

jnurmine 11mo ago

"Draft changes would create new exceptions for AI companies that would allow them to legally process special categories of data (like a person’s religious or political beliefs, ethnicity or health data) to train and operate their tech." Fully anonymized health data I can somehow understand, but what kind of AI needs to be trained with "a person's religious or political beliefs [or] ethnicity", anonymized or not?

DocTomoe 11mo ago
Ethnicity can correlate with certain genetic or health predispositions - for instance, the U.S. has long recognized that some conditions (like sickle-cell anemia or hypertension) appear more frequently in Black populations. If AI systems were forbidden from even considering such demographic factors, diagnostic accuracy could suffer.
Muromec 11mo ago
>but what kind of AI needs to be trained with "a person's religious or political beliefs [or] ethnicity", anonymized or not? It's a category thing. There is personal data and then there is sensitive personal data, which is the enumerated list you quoted. Snarky non-answer reply is of course -- the kind of ШІ that makes autistic roman salutes and accelerates from 0 to 1933.
port11 11mo ago
These categories of data are already somewhat special under the GDPR. I think we've committed enough genocide that now they're enshrined into protected data types.
zrn900 11mo ago
> but what kind of AI needs to be trained with "a person's religious or political beliefs [or] ethnicity" Propaganda AI. The EU openly declared that it will create a ministry of truth. Officially called 'fighting disinformation' of course.

nuffisnuff9 11mo ago

Hopefully it's the end of GDPR and privacy laws that absolutely no one requested. Like nobody requested that encrypted chats stop being encrypted or that X becomes a censorship target of EU comissars

seydor 11mo ago
More like the continuation with more complex regulation and exceptions.
wkat4242 11mo ago
Eh wait I requested them and I'm still very much in favour of them. Having the right to privacy is a big one. With chat control yes, that was totally evil. But I consider GDPR and DSA/DMA forces of good. The idea that there's no mandate for these things is not true.

paganel 11mo ago

[flagged]

rapsey 11mo ago
Unfortunately the downfall of the EU will not be easy or quick.
- paganel 11mo ago
  I agree it won't be easy. About quick, they were saying the same thing about the Soviets up until 1989.
- DocTomoe 11mo ago
  Germany's right-wing AfD is on a trajectory to become the largest party. One of their goals: a Dexit. An EU without the main net payer will disintegrate within months.
  - cbg0 11mo ago
    Brexit worked out so well that it basically quelled any dreams of other EU countries exiting after seeing it just creates a lot of headaches and almost no benefit to then just go back to having trade agreements with the EU while not being part of it.
    - reliabilityguy 11mo ago
      This is true until there is more countries that leave. At some point Rome fell.
    - DocTomoe 11mo ago
      There is very little benefit in EU trade agreements if there is no more EU.
- 0manrho 11mo ago
  Don't underestimate the ability of humans to make a right mess of things in short order. Often, these elaborate systems of government, finance, and/or corporation often falls very slowly and then suddenly all at once. It's not a given by any means, nor do I wish downfall of the EU or it's member states for the record, but things are rarely as stable or persistent as they seem, especially when subjected to the novel and/or unforseen.

cadamsdotcom 11mo ago

Biggest problem is you need two types economy at once. You need the big paradigm shifts that come from an innovation economy; for that, capital must flow easily, risk-taking (both companies and individuals) be rewarded not punished, and a stable job is kind of a bad thing (people get too comfortable).. Meanwhile in more mature sectors, job security (so people can have mortgages and families) and market stability should be fostered and corporate overreach & power be checked. Advanced economies are a mix of sectors which need almost opposite policy.

whimsicalism 11mo ago
Unemployment insurance and redistribution is a much better solution than keeping people in jobs that have been obviated decades ago.
miohtama 11mo ago
No one can call software and AI mature, they are still innovating. We do not even know how they will look in give years. Premature regulation kills this innovation. Harms of AI are not the same as harms from traffic accidents.
- cadamsdotcom 11mo ago
  That’s true - but social media is a different kettle of fish. The problem is it all gets lumped under “technology”.

sunshine-o 11mo ago

I was there during the 2010s and here is what happened: - I have been at a lot of public debates/consultations in Brussels on the GDPR as early as 2012. I have seen first EU people there screaming at US/BigTech lobby groups trying to influence the debate in their favor. - When we started to understand what the regulation would look like everybody started to panic about what it would cost to comply in the public and private sector. Everybody started to appoint a Chief Data Office or Chief Data Protection Officer. Consultancy firms were hired everywhere. - At the same time "The Cloud" was starting to creep up in those organizations, first as what we were calling "shadow IT". But the decisions maker didn't wanted to hear about "The Cloud" or loosing control of their infrastructure. - After usually a year of study on the GDPR issue the decision makers were told that: 1/ Our infrastructure and software stack will need deep work to comply and it is gonna cost a fortune. 2/ The business is asking for agility and is already using the cloud. 3/ Look Google, AWS and Azure have a "GDPR compliant" certificate from EY (the same firm who is usually hired for compliance study and work). - So I have seen dozens and dozens of organizations deciding their migration to the cloud between 2016 and 2019. Then of course COVID and homeworking came and it accelerated everything. So GDPR pushed everybody to hyperscalers ironically, because Big Tech is playing chess and know how decisions are made and how to work the system. Also I have never seen a big company centering or even using a Hertzner, OVH or Scaleway. What is probably going on is Big Tech went back to the Commission and explained the new legislation they have to pass. And my guess is it is not gonna help any EU based AI company stay competitive or get any significant market share. The EU will give them pennies to compete with OpenAI and Google and tell them that Europeans are smarter than Americans so David should be able to beat Goliath. Also the EU AI models have to be trained on renewable energy or whatever. Washington is rotten but Brussels is about the same (or worst).

ramblerman 11mo ago

This new package is about "removing regulation", specifically GDPR. Which let's be honest has not achieved its intended target. Google/Apple/etc can easily afford to break GDPR and get caught up in fines while as a small business owner it was a huge and complicated liability. ofc politico will frame this as a negative, it seems their only mission is to make moloch grow.

lbreakjai 11mo ago
It's not an accident. It's a very effective regulatory capture.

mmooss 11mo ago

@dang: The headline currently is Brussels knifes privacy to feed the AI boom That's inflammatory, but the current OP is inaccurate.

gnabgib 11mo ago
The current title is FTA, check out paragraph 2. Chosen by the OP or mods not to be inflammatory.

deleted 11mo ago

[deleted]

port11 11mo ago

I see the same type of comments when it comes to any post on EU tech. What I've found throughout my career is that: 1) Maybe we (EU citizens) are just way less interested in hustle culture compared to other regions. We can keep complaining about regulation and the difficulty of incorporating, but these feel like excuses. Estonia and Portugal come to mind as places where incorporating is practical but not a game-changer. Let's face it: we're just not as interested in launching stuff? We have cushy jobs, with lots of benefits, and launching a business is less required to lead a good life (i.e. we have less inequality ti push against). 2) I've started a company in Belgium of all places. Having worked in Germany for a long time: hey German buddies, it's not the difficulty of starting a business. It's much better over there. Also: deregulating the labor market more would place the majority of us at the mercy of companies a la USA. No, thanks. 3) We're not behind on tech because of the GDPR. Many things in this omnibus are just plain stupid. We should stimulate deeper tech, fundamental research, supporting all the open-source developers we have, and perhaps invest in European structural alternatives. Promote AI? Give me a break. 4) I'm a certified GDPR whatever (2 online courses). It's really not that much of a problem. If you know what data you're collecting and why, your Privacy Policy writes itself. Otherwise you use one of the services that does it for you. 5) Do we have a problem with tech salaries more than a generalised issue with rampant inflation? Because I've never had a single colleague or acquaintance move to the US because of a better salary. Not a single one. On the other hand we're in a parenting group that's full of people that came here to start a family due to the benefits we have. Improving things overall would fight any brain drain more than stimulating tech unicorns. 6) Speaking of which… I'd like to find again the study on the economic tissue of countries. It showed that it's SMEs that employ the most people and pay the bulk of the taxes. Good, decent, boring businesses. We could do less with the nonsensical fantasy of the startup unicorn as a paradigm of entrepreneurship. Okay, I'm sore from having my equity stolen at the last gig, but my point stands. Our parents and grandparents just went to business if they had to. Heck, with the current lack of jobs, many of us will do the same. Let's not pretend that we're missing a startup scene. Berlin was a great place for startups and I can't name a single of the places I've worked that is consequential to anything. Maybe Delivery Hero? But not even that one, they barely made a profit at the time. Honestly, let's stop whining so much and get yet another sector given the neoliberal deregulation treatment. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but posts complaining about EU regulations at this point feel like karma farming.