I feel the same way.  Also, despite my earlier email, it's still something
to keep an eye on; e.g. MEPs are pondering adding
<https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/CJ40-PR-731563_EN.html>
- internet security,
- text-generation (generating things "such as news articles, opinion
articles, novels, scripts, and scientific articles"),
- image/video deepfakes, and
- "AI systems intended to be used by children in ways that have a
significant impact on their personal development, including through
personalised education or their cognitive or emotional development."

as high risk AI.

On Fri, 30 Sept 2022 at 17:07, Luis Villa <[email protected]> wrote:

> Thanks for that note, Phil! To be perfectly honest I’ve found this
> particular rulemaking convoluted even by my low standards for EU
> rulemaking, and have not had the time to do a proper, end-to-end sit down
> with the docs, so this is a very useful clarification.
>
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 9:04 AM Phil Bradley-Schmieg <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi Luis,
>>
>> Before diving down that rabbit hole, at least so far as WMF ML is
>> concerned, we should remember that the Directive would apply to *high
>> risk* AI systems.  This will be a legally-defined category of systems.
>> Exactly what that will encompass is still up for debate, but you can at
>> least see the sort thing the European Commission proposers have in mind -
>> see Annexes II and III here:
>> https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52021PC0206#document2
>>
>> Regards,
>> Phil
>>
>> On Fri, 30 Sept 2022 at 16:28, Luis Villa <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 5:39 AM Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> ======
>>>>
>>>> AI Liability
>>>>
>>>> ======
>>>>
>>>> The European Commission presented a new AI Liability Directive. [4] The
>>>> stated goal is to complement the AI Act in making sure people and companies
>>>> who were harmed by high-risk AI systems (think recruitment, admissions,
>>>> autonomous drones, self-driving cars) are able to seek damages. Under the
>>>> proposed text the burden of proof on the claimant would be reversed under
>>>> certain conditions, as it would be very hard for an outside person to
>>>> understand how the AI algorithm works. Also, courts will have the explicit
>>>> right to request companies to disclose technical information about their
>>>> algorithms.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I would love to see any smart commentary on this that people have seen —
>>> so far I’ve seen very little. Bonus if it’s from European attorneys who are
>>> trying to explain EU product liability context to American audiences :)
>>>
>>> Potentially an important wrinkle on this for this audience: per the
>>> explanatory documents:
>>>
>>> “In order not to hamper innovation or research, this Directive should
>>> not apply to free and open-source software *developed … outside the
>>> course of a commercial activity**.”*
>>>
>>> Emphasis mine - does this mean that open source developed by companies
>>> (such as, at this point, much of the php stack WMF relies on, and at least
>>> part of the python ML stack that I assume WMF ML uses) is *not exempted
>>> *from this directive?
>>>
>>> “This is in particular the case for software...that is openly shared and
>>> freely accessible, usable, modifiable and redistributable.”
>>>
>>> Similarly: much ML software is *not *freely usable in the OSI sense,
>>> because of ethical field of use restrictions. Is ethical ML *more *liable
>>> than fully free ML?
>>>
>>> Related: this is just an experiment, and I don’t know how long I can
>>> keep it up, but I’m writing a newsletter on the overlap of open and ml that
>>> I suspect might be of interest to some folks here: https://openml.fyi
>>>
>>> Yours in open-
>>> Luis
>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>
>>> Publicpolicy mailing list -- [email protected]
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Publicpolicy mailing list -- [email protected]
>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Publicpolicy mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>
_______________________________________________
Publicpolicy mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to