6 ms·

Why would anyone develop AI models in the EU? You have a lot of compliance requirements and there's fewer enterprises that will pay for them

by nimish 1y ago

FirmwareBurner 1y ago
I'm guessing that due to regulations, the only AIs you'll be allowed to use in the EU will be the EU developed ones that fulfill the requirements, so there's a captive market right there for local companies. Granted, they'll probably end up performing worse than US or Chinese ones operating without restrictions and being uncompetitive on the global free market, but when did EU leaders ever think about long term consequences? Certainly not when they tied their economy to Russian gas and banned nuclear, certainly not when they prioritized toxic diesel engines over gasoline, certainly not when they demilitarized or when they ceded tech innovation to US and China, but for once this will be the right call, I can feel it, this will bring EU to the forefront of tech supremacy.
- MattPalmer1086 1y ago
  Maybe they aren't looking for tech supremacy, and prefer tech that doesn't harm their citizens?
- roguecoder 1y ago
  Why would you assume they would end up performing worse? I have yet to see a company that prioritized quality over profits, unless forced to by regulation.
  - FirmwareBurner 1y ago
    >Why would you assume they would end up performing worse? Extrapolating from historical outcomes using logic and critical thinking. No company/start-up in history ever, became successful by having to start with more regulations than their competition.
    - saubeidl 1y ago
      Vestas, the Danish wind turbine manufacturer only achieved global dominance due to Danish energy regulations in the 80s. That's just one random example that came to mind.
- pjmlp 1y ago
  Globalisation is over, and the way wars are going on, lets see what gets left of the planet to save, if at all.
  - FirmwareBurner 1y ago
    Globalization is most definitely not over because human capitalistic greed is not over, and since EU is poor in resources and it and the US lack cheap manufacturing at scale of commodity goods, it's just evolved into moving dirty manufacturing from China to Vietnam, India etc. and importing the third world into the west for cheap labor instead of using it abroad. Nor is the destruction of the planet as plenty of other countries than China will do it for western money/business opportunities. The planet is doomed either way due to factors out of your individual control, you can choose to profit out of it or die poor thinking you did the right scarified to save it when it actually did nothing and your sacrifice was in vain. The planet is not saved just because you gave up using plastic straws and switched to tethered bottle caps while China is building 9000 new coal plants, India dumps plastic waste in the ocean and BP/Chevron have the 200th oil spill. Globalization may be over from a military strategical point of view, but not from a capitalistic, economical and environmental point of view. But you go and pay more "green" taxes to the state for everything you buy, I'm sure that will save the planet.
    - pjmlp 1y ago
      Trading resources that one lacks inside the kingdom borders isn't the same as the planet scale globalisation since the end of 20th century. Trade has always existed between settlements through mankind's history, and war as well, when trade alone doesn't make it. Then there are the trade partners one trusts, and the ones we thought we could trust, and like the wind changes direction, no longer. Agree with the stupidity of plastic straws, if one people actually left the beach clean as they do at home, or maybe that is exactly what they do at home, leaving garbage all over the place.
      - FirmwareBurner 1y ago
        We're not going back to self sufficient tribal societies. Stuff like semiconductors or iphones wouldn't exist if every country tried to be self sufficient and cut out from trade the countries they don't like. You'll still be dependent on trading with comunist China and barbaric oil rich countries like Saudi Arabia who beheaded your Journalists, because they have stuff you need and can't get anywhere else, no matter how much you dislike them. There's idealistic fantasy politic for the political speeches to the unwashed masses, and then there's Realpolitik on which the world actually runs where our leaders do backroom deals with the devil in order for the line to go up.
TeMPOraL 1y ago
Because an AI model developed in the EU will, by design, be compliant with EU data and AI regulations from day one, which makes it a strong selling point for companies looking to launch AI-powered products on the EU market? Yes, regulatory compliance is a significant concern for software product design in the EU these days. But that's a good thing - it stops a lot of hare-brained ideas and abusive business models at the drafting phase. Also, from my own observation, the rules seem annoying at first, because they tend to shut down the most exciting ideas - but after a while you notice that this is because those ideas come with bad failure modes and bad second-order effects, and regulations are forcing you to actually consider them.
- miohtama 1y ago
  Maybe for businesses like governments. But EU citizens want good AI models, not EU approved models, and people can use VPN. Because regulatory process kills fast moving business and whatever is rubber stamped by EU bureaucracts and compliance-industrial complex law firms sucking out money by selling snake oil compliance services is already few years behind. Would you buy a three years old car as a new?
  - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1y ago
    > Would you buy a three years old car as a new? Regardless of how I feel about the price of the old car, I wouldn't buy the new car if it's not legal to drive on public roads.
  - saubeidl 1y ago
    I wouldn't buy a car that sometimes goes the opposite way of where I want and where the manufacturer tells me they have no idea why.
    - TeMPOraL 1y ago
      ... despite collecting enough metrics to infer the shape and weight of your body. Also there's the risk of ads suddenly appearing at the discretion of the vendor.
politelemon 1y ago
A factor that goes into that decision is the now inherent unreliability of relying on entities in the US as a partner. For some situations it's safer to do it in the EU despite the regulations.
- Alupis 1y ago
  > the now inherent unreliability What "unreliability" are you talking about in terms of American tech businesses? > For some situations it's safer to do it in the EU despite the regulations The EU has zero tech companies that rival FAANG et al here in the US. Zero. Because of it's (well-intentioned but harmful) business regulations. I have a feeling you're projecting your dissatisfaction with election results more than anything tangible...
  - roguecoder 1y ago
    Many companies see it has a positive to not have monopoly-abusing competitors able use the government they bought to crush startups.
  - bojan 1y ago
    > The EU has zero tech companies that rival FAANG et al here in the US. Zero. Because of it's (well-intentioned but harmful) business regulations. Not really, it's because the EU has 28 sets of business regulations, those of the 27 members states and of the EU itself. The single market is not yet all that single, especially when it comes to digital services. The now abandoned project of the ever closer union wasn't some idealistic bs, it was the plan to gradually fix this.
  - saubeidl 1y ago
    > What "unreliability" are you talking about in terms of American tech businesses? https://nltimes.nl/2025/05/20/microsofts-icc-email-block-triggers-dutch-concerns-dependence-us-tech https://nltimes.nl/2025/05/20/microsofts-icc-email-block-tri... This sort of stuff.
TacticalCoder 1y ago
> Why would anyone develop AI models in the EU? Not just AI models. The EU only leads in regulations and nothing else and it shows: since 2008 both China and the US have experienced insane GDP growth while the EU has been totally stagnant (inflation adjusted). I don't think people realize at which speed the EU is falling into oblivion. It's really horrible to witness from inside the EU. Cities are poorer and poorer, high-trust societies are becoming low-trust ones due to rising (imported) poverty and crimes. Cities that used to be beautiful cities now see weekly kidnapping (Paris) and AK47s are fired in Brussels on a weekly basis. But we should all applaud because AI is going to be regulated and because we're going to be green. Go EU, yay! Meanwhile people in the EU don't even want to have kids anymore: I honestly have got a hard time figuring out why young people in the EU would even want kids seen the overall atmosphere reigning here now. So while India, Brazil, China, the US, and many other countries are still going to see growth, I fully expect the EU to keep shooting itself in the foot (like it did with its car industry, destroying it with regulations and handing over the EU EV car market to China). Those who can do do, losers who cannot do regulate.
tormeh 1y ago
The fact of the matter is that of the voters who care about AI, the most vocal ones vehemently oppose it. Sabotaging AI development is a feature, not a bug. This regulation might well be an attempt at appeasing the faction that wants to ban LLMs in the EU entirely.

Why would anyone develop AI models in the EU? You have a lot of compliance requirements and there's fewer enterprises that will pay for them

by nimish 1y ago

Why would anyone develop AI models in the EU? You have a lot of compliance requirements and there's fewer enterprises that will pay for them

FirmwareBurner 1y ago

I'm guessing that due to regulations, the only AIs you'll be allowed to use in the EU will be the EU developed ones that fulfill the requirements, so there's a captive market right there for local companies. Granted, they'll probably end up performing worse than US or Chinese ones operating without restrictions and being uncompetitive on the global free market, but when did EU leaders ever think about long term consequences? Certainly not when they tied their economy to Russian gas and banned nuclear, certainly not when they prioritized toxic diesel engines over gasoline, certainly not when they demilitarized or when they ceded tech innovation to US and China, but for once this will be the right call, I can feel it, this will bring EU to the forefront of tech supremacy.

MattPalmer1086 1y ago
Maybe they aren't looking for tech supremacy, and prefer tech that doesn't harm their citizens?
roguecoder 1y ago
Why would you assume they would end up performing worse? I have yet to see a company that prioritized quality over profits, unless forced to by regulation.
- FirmwareBurner 1y ago
  >Why would you assume they would end up performing worse? Extrapolating from historical outcomes using logic and critical thinking. No company/start-up in history ever, became successful by having to start with more regulations than their competition.
  - saubeidl 1y ago
    Vestas, the Danish wind turbine manufacturer only achieved global dominance due to Danish energy regulations in the 80s. That's just one random example that came to mind.
pjmlp 1y ago
Globalisation is over, and the way wars are going on, lets see what gets left of the planet to save, if at all.
- FirmwareBurner 1y ago
  Globalization is most definitely not over because human capitalistic greed is not over, and since EU is poor in resources and it and the US lack cheap manufacturing at scale of commodity goods, it's just evolved into moving dirty manufacturing from China to Vietnam, India etc. and importing the third world into the west for cheap labor instead of using it abroad. Nor is the destruction of the planet as plenty of other countries than China will do it for western money/business opportunities. The planet is doomed either way due to factors out of your individual control, you can choose to profit out of it or die poor thinking you did the right scarified to save it when it actually did nothing and your sacrifice was in vain. The planet is not saved just because you gave up using plastic straws and switched to tethered bottle caps while China is building 9000 new coal plants, India dumps plastic waste in the ocean and BP/Chevron have the 200th oil spill. Globalization may be over from a military strategical point of view, but not from a capitalistic, economical and environmental point of view. But you go and pay more "green" taxes to the state for everything you buy, I'm sure that will save the planet.
  - pjmlp 1y ago
    Trading resources that one lacks inside the kingdom borders isn't the same as the planet scale globalisation since the end of 20th century. Trade has always existed between settlements through mankind's history, and war as well, when trade alone doesn't make it. Then there are the trade partners one trusts, and the ones we thought we could trust, and like the wind changes direction, no longer. Agree with the stupidity of plastic straws, if one people actually left the beach clean as they do at home, or maybe that is exactly what they do at home, leaving garbage all over the place.
    - FirmwareBurner 1y ago
      We're not going back to self sufficient tribal societies. Stuff like semiconductors or iphones wouldn't exist if every country tried to be self sufficient and cut out from trade the countries they don't like. You'll still be dependent on trading with comunist China and barbaric oil rich countries like Saudi Arabia who beheaded your Journalists, because they have stuff you need and can't get anywhere else, no matter how much you dislike them. There's idealistic fantasy politic for the political speeches to the unwashed masses, and then there's Realpolitik on which the world actually runs where our leaders do backroom deals with the devil in order for the line to go up.

TeMPOraL 1y ago

Because an AI model developed in the EU will, by design, be compliant with EU data and AI regulations from day one, which makes it a strong selling point for companies looking to launch AI-powered products on the EU market? Yes, regulatory compliance is a significant concern for software product design in the EU these days. But that's a good thing - it stops a lot of hare-brained ideas and abusive business models at the drafting phase. Also, from my own observation, the rules seem annoying at first, because they tend to shut down the most exciting ideas - but after a while you notice that this is because those ideas come with bad failure modes and bad second-order effects, and regulations are forcing you to actually consider them.

miohtama 1y ago
Maybe for businesses like governments. But EU citizens want good AI models, not EU approved models, and people can use VPN. Because regulatory process kills fast moving business and whatever is rubber stamped by EU bureaucracts and compliance-industrial complex law firms sucking out money by selling snake oil compliance services is already few years behind. Would you buy a three years old car as a new?
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1y ago
  > Would you buy a three years old car as a new? Regardless of how I feel about the price of the old car, I wouldn't buy the new car if it's not legal to drive on public roads.
- saubeidl 1y ago
  I wouldn't buy a car that sometimes goes the opposite way of where I want and where the manufacturer tells me they have no idea why.
  - TeMPOraL 1y ago
    ... despite collecting enough metrics to infer the shape and weight of your body. Also there's the risk of ads suddenly appearing at the discretion of the vendor.

politelemon 1y ago

A factor that goes into that decision is the now inherent unreliability of relying on entities in the US as a partner. For some situations it's safer to do it in the EU despite the regulations.

Alupis 1y ago
> the now inherent unreliability What "unreliability" are you talking about in terms of American tech businesses? > For some situations it's safer to do it in the EU despite the regulations The EU has zero tech companies that rival FAANG et al here in the US. Zero. Because of it's (well-intentioned but harmful) business regulations. I have a feeling you're projecting your dissatisfaction with election results more than anything tangible...
- roguecoder 1y ago
  Many companies see it has a positive to not have monopoly-abusing competitors able use the government they bought to crush startups.
- bojan 1y ago
  > The EU has zero tech companies that rival FAANG et al here in the US. Zero. Because of it's (well-intentioned but harmful) business regulations. Not really, it's because the EU has 28 sets of business regulations, those of the 27 members states and of the EU itself. The single market is not yet all that single, especially when it comes to digital services. The now abandoned project of the ever closer union wasn't some idealistic bs, it was the plan to gradually fix this.
- saubeidl 1y ago
  > What "unreliability" are you talking about in terms of American tech businesses? https://nltimes.nl/2025/05/20/microsofts-icc-email-block-triggers-dutch-concerns-dependence-us-tech https://nltimes.nl/2025/05/20/microsofts-icc-email-block-tri... This sort of stuff.

TacticalCoder 1y ago

> Why would anyone develop AI models in the EU? Not just AI models. The EU only leads in regulations and nothing else and it shows: since 2008 both China and the US have experienced insane GDP growth while the EU has been totally stagnant (inflation adjusted). I don't think people realize at which speed the EU is falling into oblivion. It's really horrible to witness from inside the EU. Cities are poorer and poorer, high-trust societies are becoming low-trust ones due to rising (imported) poverty and crimes. Cities that used to be beautiful cities now see weekly kidnapping (Paris) and AK47s are fired in Brussels on a weekly basis. But we should all applaud because AI is going to be regulated and because we're going to be green. Go EU, yay! Meanwhile people in the EU don't even want to have kids anymore: I honestly have got a hard time figuring out why young people in the EU would even want kids seen the overall atmosphere reigning here now. So while India, Brazil, China, the US, and many other countries are still going to see growth, I fully expect the EU to keep shooting itself in the foot (like it did with its car industry, destroying it with regulations and handing over the EU EV car market to China). Those who can do do, losers who cannot do regulate.

tormeh 1y ago

The fact of the matter is that of the voters who care about AI, the most vocal ones vehemently oppose it. Sabotaging AI development is a feature, not a bug. This regulation might well be an attempt at appeasing the faction that wants to ban LLMs in the EU entirely.