Completely discounting EU for any technological progress from here on out. As if the tech landscape in EU isn’t already dire.

Completely discounting EU for any technological progress from here on out. As if the tech landscape in EU isn’t already dire. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/08/technology/eu-ai-act-regulation.html

I’m reserving my judgment until I read the actual legislation. The WIP legislation from last June seemed to have sensible language (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2021/698792/EPRS_BRI(2021)698792_EN.pdf): 1/

Aviator, diver, Etherean, nexialist, PhD in aviation ∩ climate science | Host of /diving /ethfinance /eth-staker /geopolitics /science /singapore /thomas

A wide range of 'high-risk' AI systems would be authorised, but subject to a set of requirements and obligations to gain access to the EU market. Those AI systems presenting only 'limited risk' would be subject to very light transparency obligations. » 3/

Coming from a high-safety / seven-sigma industry (aviation), having a common taxonomy for classifying AI systems and using a risk-based approach are sensible first steps to me.

Of course, the proof will be in the proverbial pudding that the act doesn’t stifle whatever AI innovation Europe is producing. 4/

« To establish a technology-neutral definition of AI systems in EU law and to lay down a classification for AI systems with different requirements and obligations tailored on a 'risk-based approach'. Some AI systems presenting 'unacceptable' risks would be prohibited. 2/