The future of open source AI seems to be up in the air right now, with the EU potentially seeking to place heavy restrictions on generative AI that would severely hamper or outright ban open source projects.

The EU industry chief Thierry Breton wants generative AI like ChatGPT to be considered "high risk" and thus tightly controlled (including downstream applications), which would make open source versions extremely difficult or even impossible to release: https://www.reuters.com/technology/eus-breton-warns-chatgpt-risks-ai-rules-seek-tackle-concerns-2023-02-03/

This article reads like Breton wants to stop any open source competition to ChatGPT, and wants such systems only available under tight control from large corporations.

That seems like a threat to ensuring that humanity can enjoy the benefits of such technology equally.

They can use their detector to train a better model that is able to defeat the detector. They are also likely doing this so that they can try to minimize the amount of AI content in future training datasets.

Where are you getting the file size from?

LAION and other groups are working on open source chatbots right now as we speak, and they're making great progress.

> Eventually, Microsoft and Adobe joined forces and designed a new feature called Content Credentials, which they hope will someday appear on every authentic photo and video.

> Already, 900 companies have agreed to display the Content Credentials button. They represent the entire life cycle of photos and videos, from the camera that takes them (such as Nikon and Canon), to the websites that display them (The New York Times, Wall Street Journal).

> Now, Content Credentials aren't going to be a silver bullet. Laws and education will also be needed, so that we, the people, can fine-tune our baloney detectors.

This sounds like they are selling access to centralized database (that will likely be easy to manipulate), and saying that they want laws to mandate the use of their product.

> The university said on Friday the school had emailed all students and faculty announcing a ban on ChatGPT and all other AI-based tools at Sciences Po.

> Sciences Po, whose main campus is in Paris, added that punishment for using the software may go as far as exclusion from the institution, or even from French higher education as a whole.

This seems a lot worse than the title implies. They are banning all AI tools, which is completely insane.

> OpenAI, the nonprofit that created ChatGPT,

The reporter either couldn't even do the bare minimum of research to see that its a for profit company since 2019, or they failed to double check the output of the automatic news writing bot (ironically spreading misinformation). Why should I trust the article when it fails to get the basic information right?

Seems like it would have been easier for them to reach it as it was on land, rather than at sea like this whale.

The digital watermark though risks damaging the model outputs, and would rendered useless when changing generated the text output yourself.

Dude, have you ever been to a public library before? You can literally find books on how best to kill people and get away with it, how to cook drugs, how to make explosives, and all sorts of things. Why do you want to do the digital equivalent of burning libraries?

In practice though cryptography regulations in the US simply require notifying the government agency of the release. That's all there is, so its not really regulation of what you can and cannot do with it.

I guess that's what passed for a "graphic sexual image" back in the 1980s lol

> provide to the public any passwords, security codes or materials to override security features

This seems like it could have been a major security issue if it was included as part of the legislation.

They can also buy critics' personal information to use for attempted assassinations.

I'd definitely watch a movie or TV show featuring SCP-3008. It might also make a really interesting survival game as well.

The Australian government (eSafety Commissioner) is already demanding that companies implement encryption backdoors and mandatory proactive scanning for anything potentially "illegal". Source

I don't think people realize just how bad things are in Australia right now for anyone who cares about privacy and security online.

Its also interesting that r/Australia always calls out their governments anti-privacy bullshit, while non Australians on this subreddits are sometimes supportive of articles like these.

> The e-Safety Commissioner, an office set up to protect internet users, said that after sending legal demands for information to some of the world's biggest internet firms, the responses showed Apple and Microsoft did not proactively screen for child abuse material in their storage services, iCloud and OneDrive.

> An Apple announcement a week ago that it would stop scanning iCloud accounts for child abuse, following pressure from privacy advocates, was "a major step backwards from their responsibilities to help keep children safe" Inman Grant said.

> The failure of both firms to detect live-streamed abuse amounted to "some of the biggest and richest technology companies in the world turning a blind eye and failing to take appropriate steps to protect the most vulnerable from the most predatory", she added.

These authoritarians want encryption backdoors and mass surveillance tools deployed on every device and service.

Depends on the frequency used.

SnapChat is still lagging behind other apps on implementing proper end to end encryption.