(Yesterday 12:26 AM)C C Wrote: . . . a sprawling legal framework designed to regulate artificial intelligence across all member states. The EU’s top officials and lawmakers were delighted with their effort ... While Europe’s leaders convinced themselves that they’d done the right thing in establishing the world’s strictest AI guardrails, companies in the US and China were pushing AI into a world that the EU’s Act barely touched on. ... Meanwhile the UK, thanks to Brexit, was spared the EU’s ‘safety first’ approach and was able to capitalise on its regulatory freedom...
While it's true that Britain escaped from Brussels' regulatory spiderweb, they never really took advantage of the opportunity. The UK had the potential to remake themselves to become to Europe what Singapore is to Southeast Asia. The business capital, the focus of innovation and entrepeneurship. But ten years later, none of that has happened. I don't really expect Britain to be appreciably ahead of the rest of Europe in AI.
Again, what Britain really needs is an entrepeneurial culture that rewards risk taking, along with a strong venture capital sector ready and able to put real money into projects that are most likely to be successful.
What Britain doesn't need are consolidated and nationalized "champions" like the former British Steel, the former British Aircraft and all the rest of the once vital industries that were nationalized by successive Labour governments and hardly exist today. Extending that model to British AI would be a disaster.
That said, I think that Europe (and Britain along with it) is heading into a dramatically transformative period that has at least the potential to change everything. New political parties, new ideologies to displace the implicit Marxism that has been influencing European intellectuals for the better part of a century.
So I still have hope for them. We might start seeing exciting new ideas coming from some unlikely places.
Yesterday 05:58 AM
