This is a lot of money going into compute.
I will say this again. EU is sleeping on the opportunity to throw money in an opensource initiative, in a field were money matter and the field is still (kind of) level.
I will say this again. EU is sleeping on the opportunity to throw money in an opensource initiative, in a field were money matter and the field is still (kind of) level.
Then let's train our network so as not to spew out or make up PII data - easy peasy
Then let's make it able to delete PII data that it has inadvertedly collected on request. Simultaneously it should be recording all the conversations for safety reasons. that must be possible somehow
And let's make sure it never impersonates or makes up defamatory content - that must be super easy.
And let's make it explain itself. But explain truthfully, by giving an oath, not like ChatGPT that likes making things up.
Looks very doable to me
Doesn’t have any of the constraints you’re talking about.
If you're worried about being identified from alt-accounts you're much more likely to be tracked via reuse of emails or some other information that you have slipped (see multitude of cases)
Simple text is not PII, laws are not interpreted like technical discussions are https://xkcd.com/1494/
The Golem-Class model behaves in a 'humanlike' manner because it's trained on actual real data like we'd experience in the world. What you're suggesting is some insane psychology test that we'd never allow to happen to a human.
Can you elaborate? Because I think it’s nearly insurmountable.
Is the sentence “Meagan Smith graduated magma cum laude from Northwestern’s business program in 2004” PII? How about if another part of the corpus says “M. Smith had a promising career in business after graduating with honors from a prestigious school, but an unplanned pregnancy caused her to quit her job in 2006”?
Does it matter if it’s from fiction? What if the fiction it comes from uses real people? Or if there might be both real and fictional Meagan Smiths?
And how so you process that kind of thing at the scale of billions of documents?
This is a very hard problem, especially at scale.
> “M. Smith had a promising career in business after graduating with honors from a prestigious school, but an unplanned pregnancy caused her to quit her job in 2006”
The main issue is how that statement ended up there in the first place. Even then how many "M. Smith" have studied in prestigious schools? By itself that phrase wouldn't be PII
Now if you have a db entry with "M Smith" and entries for biographical data that's definitely PII
The AI should also make it 100% clear that whatever gets produced is clearly identifiable as coming form an AI. As a consequence; text cannot be produced because it would be trivial to remove the disclaimer. A currently proposed bill indicates that the AI should only be able to produce images in an obscure format with a randomised watermark that covers at least 65% of the pixels of the image. The bill is scheduled for ratification in 2028 and must be signed by 100% of the state members.
Until then, the grant for the development of this world changing AI is on accelerated path ! Teams can fill a 65 pages document to have a shot at getting a whole $1 million.
Accenture and Capgemini are working on it.
Unless of course you have a legitimate reason for that data to be in the AI, or to reject the privacy request. What is and is not legitimate isn't specified anywhere because it's obvious. If you ask for clarification because you think it's not obvious, you won't be given any because we don't do things that way around here. If you interpret this clause in a way that we later decide makes us look bad, then the definition of "need" and "legitimate" will change at that moment to make us look good.
BTW inability to retrain within three days is not a legitimate reason. Nor is the need to be competitive with US firms. Now here is your 300,000 EUR grant, have fun!
But yes, in a half-century I'm very curious where Europe will be. India passed the UK in gdp recently and Germany sooner or later.
I don't think government funding to compete with private businesses works well
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/ec-...
Another bright idea was to let both projects be managed by large reputable French corporations that everybody trusts. With no software DNA.
How come did both fail?
Edit: One of the largest European provider today, OVH, who existed at the time and was already the leader in France was explicitly left out of both projects... Because the founder is not a guy we can trust you know, he didn't attend the best schools.
Govt=Legal grift
It's the same all over europe mostly, sadly.
We were pioneers in the medieval times, we can follow up the leaders barely now
The two heavily subsidized projects were:
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloudwatt
- https://login.numergy.com/login?service=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nu...
For the one still "live", details include French URL names :)
Edit: A Google Translate of the home page. Close your eyes, imagine a homepage highlighting the essence of cloud computing:
Your Numergy space Access the administration of your virtual machines.
Secure connection Username Password Forgot your password ?
Administration of your VMs Administer your virtual machines in real time, monitor their activity, your bandwidth consumption and the use of your storage spaces.
Changing your personal information Access the customer area and modify your personal information in just a few clicks: surname, first name, address.
Securing your data Remember to change your password regularly to maintain an optimal level of security.
It hasn’t been very impressive (undertrained I believe).