I call article shenanigans.

Element is a UK company. Which is not part of the EU. Why should the EU choose to use a non-European company, headquartered in a non-European country, with a non-European, non-compliant legal system?

The UK is already barred from offering unrestricted financial services in the EU, I expect communications services to be an area of concern.

Brexit is Brexit. The UK is out, and simply cannot be trusted with European communications backbones.

I may be willing to believe that there's been a tender process and their product is currently being evaluated, but on privacy grounds alone I doubt their product passes the bar unless they reincorporate in an EU country with 51% EU ownership, all other things being equal.

Warnings about its dangers need to be stated in a way that they will understand. Like maybe "All AI models already have a kill switch: the computer's power cord.

That's literally not a kill switch. How do you kill an AI if you're not in the room where the power cord is plugged in?

"Your honour, I tried killing my AI but it runs in the cloud and I don't know where. Also my AI service supplier refused to turn it off for me when I called them"

Kill switches are a very good thing. When you need them you need them to work. Like any good tool, they are complex to implement correctly. And like any good tool, they should be implemented early. Not as an afterthought, like these AI companies want to do.

A world without kill switches is a world where the kill switch is an EMP.

And rightly so. The senator is not Trump. He is not immune from prosecution like Trump is. So it makes perfect sense that if someone doxxed Trump it should be treated differently than if Trump doxxed a regular American. Trump is a special case with special rights.

I(f you don't like it, maybe don't elect a king?)

There are people who do, Mr Coward, and there are people who don't do. You're one of those.

Well, you're a Coward, Mr Anonymous. So obviously I think you're too scared to actually do what the French did.

Can we call it Stupid Intelligence yet?

Yup. I'm expecting "lickable" buttons and windows next.

A judge typically has that discretion already. Your point of view is valid, but I think it encourages gaming, like any other situation where the payoff is thought to be known in advance.

Disagree. Why should people get a pass from accountability so long as they whitelist?

I'm all for layering everything. I'm not for giving people a pass from accountability "if they do X".

We have enough people on Earth. Punishing those who fuck up isn't going to make us extinct.

When was the last time Bill Gates really did anything relevant in computing? According to Google the last time he did any coding that contributed to anything was 1989. He stepped down from running Microsoft in 2008. According to Mr. Gates, his last major coding effort was 1983.

Just because someone did something with computers once doesn't mean they know anything about current events. Bill Gates opinion on AI is about as relevant as the women who programmed the Eniac or Charles Babbage. Actually Babbage probably had a more relevant understanding of AI than Bill Gates.

Shenanigans all the way down

Security disclosures raise a legitimate question: who authorized live experimentation on public infrastructure, and who refuses to shut down these hacking attempts by turning off these "AI" scripts?

I just want one that speaks Gort.

Klaatu ... barata ... neck??? *cough*cough*cough*

If you do, millions of cats will spontaneously decrement their 9 lives counters!

Agreed. Rei has a classic misunderstanding of the data processing inequality