[dotsam]

Don't worry, humans will still be relevant for ~10 years!.

(and then regrettably irrelevant thereafter).

I think it is a legitimate worry, as the pace of progress is considerable. These tools are impressive, and are only going to get more impressive: more people should be talking about where this is headed.

[trention]

These models are literally one French court decision away from being banned and investment in them being completely halted. So I wouldn't worry too much about them specifically.

[tehsauce]

I think the opposite is true. I think we're closer to the beginning of a kind of arms race.

[zepolen]

Yes because banning alcohol, drugs, porn, prostitution and profanity in music sure got rid of them!

[trention]

It would have gotten rid of every single one of those if the only method for their production required a tech company to invest a 8-digit sum in R&D and said tech company was threatened with litigation.

[Nevermark]

Porn companies, Facebook, Uber, ... these are just the latest companies, in a long line, for whom huge lawsuits and fortune-sized settlements are simply a line item on the expense sheet.

[trention]

Are you somehow under the impression that, if a government decides to impose a fine that will financially kill the company once and for all, it is incapable of it?

Incidentally, Uber has been banned in the entire country where I live for 8+ years now.

[Nevermark]

Of course. And that kind of action would make corporations sit up.

But what a government can do, and what its politicians will do are very different things. The political backlash for going nuclear on corporations would be massive and sustained. Not even good acting corporations want that kind of thing happening.

Regarding, Uber and your country: your point makes my point stronger.

A whole country is now off limits to Uber, but on the whole, across all the countries, their aggressive behaviors has been a win for them anyway. Just another cost of business.

[rnk]

That is nonsensical. Maybe one country might decide to try to stop it, the internet has shown that doesn't work.

[ronsor]

Why French court? If other countries don't ban them, France will just be hurting itself.

[trention]

A french court banning it will probably be a (short) precursor to an EU-wide ban which is effectively a worldwide ban. EU courts will be fining companies heavily if they don't comply which effectively means big tech no longer invests a penny in models. I use 'French court' here mostly because I believe it most likely to be firstly litigated there.

[CalRobert]

I imagine plenty of companies in the rest of the world will happily make use of it.

[trention]

Spoiler alert: EU can fine and (if needed) seize assets of companies based outside of the EU.

[ronsor]

Only if those companies have EU assets*

Even still, if the EU chooses to regress, I can imagine a lot of non-EU-based companies—especially smaller ones—just choosing not to deal with them anymore

[rnk]

Yeah, just like Facebook and Google can't operate in Europe, or the US isn't still spying on the whole world still. Those eu courts really control them.

[trention]

EU courts fined google just this week. Way to prove exactly how uninformed you are. There has been no reason to ban meta or google in EU so far, but you can ask RT how good their operations are at the moment.

[astrange]

EU wouldn’t ban homegrown technology. They’re making up laws an an excuse to punish Google for not being EU based, it’s not that Google happens to be violating the law.