The whole point of regulating it is to shape what it will look like in a couple of years.

We know what the market will look like. Quasi monopoly and basic user rights violated.

> before we have any idea what the market is going to look like in a couple years.

Oh, we already know large chunks of it, and the regulations explicitly address that.

If the chest-beating crowd would be presented with these regulations piecemeal, without ever mentioning EU, they'd probably be in overwhelming support of each part.

But since they don't care to read anything and have an instinctive aversion to all things regulatory and most things EU, we get the boos and the jeers

Regulating it while the cat is out of the bag leads to monopolistic conglomerates like Meta and Google. Meta shouldn't have been allowed to usurp instagram and whatsapp, Google shouldn't have been allowed to bring Youtube into the fold. Now it's too late to regulate a way out of this.

I literally lived this with GDPR. In the beginning every one ran around pretending to understand what it meant. There were a ton of consultants and lawyers that basically made up stuff that barely made sense. They grifted money out of startups by taking the most aggressive interpretation and selling policy templates.

In the end the regulation was diluted to something that made sense(ish) but that process took about 4 years. It also slowed down all enterprise deals because no one knew if a deal was going to be against GDPR and the lawyers defaulted to “no” in those orgs.

Asking regulators to understand and shape market evolution in AI is basically asking them to trade stocks by reading company reports written in mandarin.

Exactly. No anonymity, no thought crime, lots of filters to screen out bad misinformation, etc. Regulate it.

they dont want a marlet. They want total control, as usual for control freaks.