Isn't the recent AI regulation voted in Europe a problem for this company?
And Mistral has been betting on an open-source first approach. One might even wonder if there is some causation between the two decisions, one direction or the other.
[1]: https://www.reuters.com/technology/eus-ai-act-could-exclude-...
I have ranted about this before on HN, so bear with me here: all countries should take reasonable steps that they can afford to secure their own infrastructure: energy, water, food, some local manufacturing, IT, AI, education, etc. This “one world order” stuff is bull-shit. The world is a better place with many cultures, ethnicities, more self-sufficiency, etc. My wife and I like to travel to meet people with very different backgrounds, see new places. I cringe thinking of a “vanilla” world where large corporations and elite interests “homogenize” the world.
I think the EU and its member countries are largely content with taxing American tech giants - no need to rock the boat.
As for the actual question, there was talk about foundational models being subject to less scrutiny than the applications using them. So it's quite possible it won't be a problem for Mistral or other LLM companies
But again, we don't actually know what the latest agreement was and what the new draft will be like
Maybe not that big of a problem but the EU legislation that just passed wants the companies building models to hand over technical documentation, comply with EU copyright laws and give detailed information about the data used for training the models. So basically I take it's there's going to be some annoying administrative work to do but it doesn't seem impossible to comply with.
The world is a big place. And moving the talent to a place less regulation-crazy than the EU is not very hard.