5 ms·

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_Intelligence_Act#Penalties https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_Intelligence_Act#Pe... Europe shot itself in the d

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_Intelligence_Act#Penalties https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_Intelligence_Act#Pe... Europe shot itself in the dick with this hastily implemented at the height of mass hysteria bullshit and now no sane company will build anything there. an AI startup in the US or China can be a boy and his computer. in Europe, the boy needs a dozen lawyers. Mistral's sinking into irrelevancy despite the head start they had, the very promising early models they released, and the funding they receive, might very well be the consequence of trying to comply with all that crap.

djvdq 4mo ago
It's yet another time when EU is killing our own possibilities to build real competition to US or Chinese tech. And yet another time they will be thinking aloud in few year "what happened that we are fully dependent on USA?"
gspr 4mo ago
So you're saying AI models should be allowed to freely "manipulate human behavior"?
- xienze 4mo ago
  The problem is that statement is a bit too open to interpretation. Ever had Claude piss you off by being stupid and talking in circles? Sounds like manipulation of human behavior!
  - gspr 4mo ago
    No reasonable person would find a system's annoying behavior on its own manipulative. It could, however, be considered manipulative if it was made that way on purpose.
- cm2012 4mo ago
  That is almost a meaningless sentence. Cats and traffic lights both manipulate human behavior.
  - gspr 4mo ago
    You know exactly what the intent of the lawmakers was.
    - cm2012 4mo ago
      No, I definitely dont. And neither do they, its hundreds of law makers. Meaning is usually sussed out through case law.
      - disgruntledphd2 4mo ago
        In common law countries, yes. Most of the EU runs on civil law though.
- deleted 4mo ago
  [deleted]
antirez 4mo ago
Possibly yes but let me remember you that France, Italy Germany were against the AI act, so here something very odd is happening, that the EU funding nations are getting marginalized by the countries they welcomed on key topics for our future, and I believe corruption could be a big part of what is happening, both internal to those three countries and at an even more alarming rate in other countries.
- neonstatic 4mo ago
  > the EU funding nations are getting marginalized by the countries they welcomed Thank you for reminding us that all animals are equal, but some are more equal
  - antirez 4mo ago
    It's not a matter of importance, but that bad actors as they tried to do in Italy, corrupting EU parliament, may be doing the same with counties are have less visibility. A weak EU is not also in the best interest of countries that wanted the AI act, and surely not in the interest of their citizens, but there could be pressures.
    - neonstatic 4mo ago
      I understand your point, I just object to the language and dividing the EU into more and less important blocks. If a voting mechanism is broken, that's where the issue is.
    - deleted 4mo ago
      [deleted]
- gregorygoc 4mo ago
  EU big nations getting marginalized: haha. The only reason there’s no US-like tariff on Chinese cars is because Germany was too scared it would lose its access to Chinese market.
- alecco 4mo ago
  Who put a nepo-baby lawyer in charge of the big €95bn AI fund? EU bureaucrats living the 6-figure high life with chauffeurs and private jets in a bubble completely isolated from reality. I hate the fake European foreign-backed right-wing parties but they didn't cause the current situation. But I'm afraid it might be too late as the cancer spread and did too much damage. Insane regulations, no energy, looming demographic/pension crisis, tax hell, and collapsing industries.
darkamaul 4mo ago
Well , there isn’t also the opposite take from TechCrunch where they say: Why Paris may be the most important AI city outside Silicon Valley. [0] While the EU loves its regulation, I still feel it’s too early to write it down in the AI race. It will not replace Anthropic or OpenAI any time soon, but even Google and Meta fail to do that. If AI continue to grow and expand, there is enough space for many more unicorns. [0] https://techcrunch.com/2026/05/28/why-paris-may-be-the-most-important-ai-city-outside-silicon-valley/ https://techcrunch.com/2026/05/28/why-paris-may-be-the-most-...
- throw-the-towel 4mo ago
  As someone who has actually experienced the hiring market in Paris, I have a hard time believing this. The salaries are, unfortunately, pathetic.
- ggrelet 4mo ago
  Tbh, that article is not a take, rather an ad for Viva Tech and TechCrunch own tech gathering
tardedmeme 4mo ago
Way more important than this act are the police raids. Someone used your SaaS to send phishing (see today's front page HN)? They'll just take all your servers away. Goodbye business. Unless they think the general public would riot, so established companies are okay. You can't build a castle on a foundation of quicksand.
Epa095 4mo ago
You don't compete with anthrophopic from the basement. For that you need either a shit loads of money, or a government which are not afraid of getting very very involved. There is a lot of Europeans working on AI, it's just that a lot of them work for American companies. Because of money.
- alecco 4mo ago
  I think both of you are correct.
sofixa 4mo ago
Did you read even a summary of the AI Act? The gist of it is very simple - depending on the risk of what you're doing with AI, you have to document why it did what it did, and be able to explain it; or you can't use it at all. So if you're using AI for mass surveillance, you can't; if you're using it for treating loan applications you need to be able to explain why it approved/denied; if it's a customer service chatbot, do whatever, nobody cares. Not only is burden of the legislation fairly low (and a lot of it hasn't come into force yet), it is extremely reasonable. No, sorry, we don't want a UnitedHealthcare using a broken algorithm on purpose to deny as much care as possible and hiding behind computer says no.
mhitza 4mo ago
So let me get this straight. You think that Europe "shot itself in the dick" by making it harder to deploy AI that: - manipulates, including subliminally (hope you'll like your subliminal Ads mixed into your LLM output) - profiling for social scoring - automated thread labeling as an individual, with no human supervision - facetracking databases - emotional and "well-being" monitoring at work or in schools - + many other kinds of surveillance tools. I hope you are joking. edit: For context this was a snippet of prohibited use, which the fines listed on Wikipedia (theoretically apply to), https://artificialintelligenceact.eu/article/5/ https://artificialintelligenceact.eu/article/5/
- disgruntledphd2 4mo ago
  No, all of that stuff is fine (I have read the AI act). It's all the compliance stuff that will cause issues, particularly in non financial services businesses. Each EU country will end up badly implementing a national regulator, and these will mostly be bad and stop good stuff from happening.

djvdq 4mo ago

It's yet another time when EU is killing our own possibilities to build real competition to US or Chinese tech. And yet another time they will be thinking aloud in few year "what happened that we are fully dependent on USA?"

gspr 4mo ago

So you're saying AI models should be allowed to freely "manipulate human behavior"?

xienze 4mo ago
The problem is that statement is a bit too open to interpretation. Ever had Claude piss you off by being stupid and talking in circles? Sounds like manipulation of human behavior!
- gspr 4mo ago
  No reasonable person would find a system's annoying behavior on its own manipulative. It could, however, be considered manipulative if it was made that way on purpose.
cm2012 4mo ago
That is almost a meaningless sentence. Cats and traffic lights both manipulate human behavior.
- gspr 4mo ago
  You know exactly what the intent of the lawmakers was.
  - cm2012 4mo ago
    No, I definitely dont. And neither do they, its hundreds of law makers. Meaning is usually sussed out through case law.
    - disgruntledphd2 4mo ago
      In common law countries, yes. Most of the EU runs on civil law though.
deleted 4mo ago
[deleted]

antirez 4mo ago

Possibly yes but let me remember you that France, Italy Germany were against the AI act, so here something very odd is happening, that the EU funding nations are getting marginalized by the countries they welcomed on key topics for our future, and I believe corruption could be a big part of what is happening, both internal to those three countries and at an even more alarming rate in other countries.

neonstatic 4mo ago
> the EU funding nations are getting marginalized by the countries they welcomed Thank you for reminding us that all animals are equal, but some are more equal
- antirez 4mo ago
  It's not a matter of importance, but that bad actors as they tried to do in Italy, corrupting EU parliament, may be doing the same with counties are have less visibility. A weak EU is not also in the best interest of countries that wanted the AI act, and surely not in the interest of their citizens, but there could be pressures.
  - neonstatic 4mo ago
    I understand your point, I just object to the language and dividing the EU into more and less important blocks. If a voting mechanism is broken, that's where the issue is.
  - deleted 4mo ago
    [deleted]
gregorygoc 4mo ago
EU big nations getting marginalized: haha. The only reason there’s no US-like tariff on Chinese cars is because Germany was too scared it would lose its access to Chinese market.
alecco 4mo ago
Who put a nepo-baby lawyer in charge of the big €95bn AI fund? EU bureaucrats living the 6-figure high life with chauffeurs and private jets in a bubble completely isolated from reality. I hate the fake European foreign-backed right-wing parties but they didn't cause the current situation. But I'm afraid it might be too late as the cancer spread and did too much damage. Insane regulations, no energy, looming demographic/pension crisis, tax hell, and collapsing industries.

darkamaul 4mo ago

Well , there isn’t also the opposite take from TechCrunch where they say: Why Paris may be the most important AI city outside Silicon Valley. [0] While the EU loves its regulation, I still feel it’s too early to write it down in the AI race. It will not replace Anthropic or OpenAI any time soon, but even Google and Meta fail to do that. If AI continue to grow and expand, there is enough space for many more unicorns. [0] https://techcrunch.com/2026/05/28/why-paris-may-be-the-most-important-ai-city-outside-silicon-valley/ https://techcrunch.com/2026/05/28/why-paris-may-be-the-most-...

throw-the-towel 4mo ago
As someone who has actually experienced the hiring market in Paris, I have a hard time believing this. The salaries are, unfortunately, pathetic.
ggrelet 4mo ago
Tbh, that article is not a take, rather an ad for Viva Tech and TechCrunch own tech gathering

tardedmeme 4mo ago

Way more important than this act are the police raids. Someone used your SaaS to send phishing (see today's front page HN)? They'll just take all your servers away. Goodbye business. Unless they think the general public would riot, so established companies are okay. You can't build a castle on a foundation of quicksand.

Epa095 4mo ago

You don't compete with anthrophopic from the basement. For that you need either a shit loads of money, or a government which are not afraid of getting very very involved. There is a lot of Europeans working on AI, it's just that a lot of them work for American companies. Because of money.

alecco 4mo ago
I think both of you are correct.

sofixa 4mo ago

Did you read even a summary of the AI Act? The gist of it is very simple - depending on the risk of what you're doing with AI, you have to document why it did what it did, and be able to explain it; or you can't use it at all. So if you're using AI for mass surveillance, you can't; if you're using it for treating loan applications you need to be able to explain why it approved/denied; if it's a customer service chatbot, do whatever, nobody cares. Not only is burden of the legislation fairly low (and a lot of it hasn't come into force yet), it is extremely reasonable. No, sorry, we don't want a UnitedHealthcare using a broken algorithm on purpose to deny as much care as possible and hiding behind computer says no.

mhitza 4mo ago

So let me get this straight. You think that Europe "shot itself in the dick" by making it harder to deploy AI that: - manipulates, including subliminally (hope you'll like your subliminal Ads mixed into your LLM output) - profiling for social scoring - automated thread labeling as an individual, with no human supervision - facetracking databases - emotional and "well-being" monitoring at work or in schools - + many other kinds of surveillance tools. I hope you are joking. edit: For context this was a snippet of prohibited use, which the fines listed on Wikipedia (theoretically apply to), https://artificialintelligenceact.eu/article/5/ https://artificialintelligenceact.eu/article/5/

disgruntledphd2 4mo ago
No, all of that stuff is fine (I have read the AI act). It's all the compliance stuff that will cause issues, particularly in non financial services businesses. Each EU country will end up badly implementing a national regulator, and these will mostly be bad and stop good stuff from happening.