The issue with 'sovereign' is not about sneaky things a foreign entity might put in there, it's about control of the stack.

Since no individual buyer cares that much about geostrategic issues, it's almost impossible to get some random European company to think about buying anything other than 'whatever US or China' are making.

There has to be very concerted push to make a difference.

Legal mandates around sovereignty (be very careful here) could make a difference.

But there will also be market reaction: US/China companies will bend on some level and provide things like 100% EU hosted and even comply with some data source stuff.

The only real path is to be more competitive as a continent.

▲

jwpapi 44 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

If you self-host an open model on a sovereign hoster? They can only influence the responses correct? We are not talking about extracting information.

Or are we worried that open models send secret telemetry?

▲

Loquebantur 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The EU AI act isn't primarily about "geostrategy". It's about protecting society.

AI models act as a force multiplier for intelligence, in particular for generating information according to someone's wishes.

I.e. deepfakes and social media mis-/disinformation campaigns are a thing and having powerful AI allows you to do those at scales that can overwhelm society's resilience.

In general, even if you have "aligned" AI: aligned with whom or what?

Whom are you comfortable with lording as a some demi-god over you, dictating what to believe?

	▲	holaysuns 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		European regulations are 100% geostrategy and they are defending against external interests. Those laws would not exist if European champions were leading the world. "are you comfortable with lording as a some demi-god over you, dictating what to believe?" Yes, Europe handed over all of the decisions about everything to foreign powers, now they have to enact regulations to try to constrain it. Zuck et. al. make the investments decisions for Europe, by virtue of you all giving him the money and power to do that. Stop giving him the money/power, then this regulation won't exist

▲

Oras 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> Since no individual buyer cares that much about geostrategic issues

You clearly haven’t worked in enterprise in the EU. Location of data processor is the first thing they check. That’s why every major cloud has regions with different offerings, not just for HA and redundancy

▲

holaysuns 5 hours ago | parent [-]

They care because the are 'required to', otherwise those 'offerings' wouldn't even exist. It's mostly the result of regulatory action.

▲

JaggerJo 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I’m working with clients (big companies) that care a lot - but not because they have to. They care because they lost trust in non EU players.

▲

rokkamokka 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

They also care because it's becoming increasingly risky to rely on US companies given the current political situation

▲

bdangubic 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

nope, that no longer holds any water. was true though couple of years ago…

	▲	holaysuns 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The argument holds most of the water. Yes - security concerns are now very real, but do not fall for this idea that anyone really cares about structural concerns. Tons of EU companies are still selling crap to Russia, happy to look the other way wile the bear devours a neighbour, as long as profits are there. What has happened is that Trump has given a face to the reality, and so companies are adjusting on some level. But 1) it will be nominal 2) Trump will be gone and the impetus will fade 3) the conglomerates will react 4) modest legislation will mean ... The can will get kicked down the road. The invasion of E. Europe by Russia has not even caused defence spending or the size of Armies to change, doctrine is barely changing. Nothing will make those beheamoths change other than other forms of structural concern. The 'Riet of the Right' - partly due to collapse of Auto / China (among many other things) might cause some change. But the change won't happen until well after the damage has been done. Brexit should have been an opportunity for institutional reform of the EU, but no - they blamed it all on populism. Certain governing entities in Europe will try to move away from Microsoft, they will be pulled back. There is hope, and certain champions can rise and causes pieces to collapse. If SUSE had any true entrepreneurial whereiwthal - they would create a true consumer / prosumer / enterprise-user friendly variation and brand their flavour of Unix - and make sure that all Euopean governments us it exclusively, which would cascade into widespread use. There are variations of insta, youtube, netflix that should all be Europe based that could 'theoretically happen' but it needs some structural impetus. Things usually don't change. Usually there needs to be a collapse and re-order of the system for that to happne. The people in charge just want to keep their jobs, their very high salaries, and protect their retirement, and will be happy to 'sell out' whatever other imperatives along the way. Ending with a positive not - I would say current conditions mean the change is now 'plausible, it not likely' whereas before it was 'not very plausible'. So there's a candle, a bit of wind, but not a lot of tinder or dry wood.