> Article 59 seems relevant, other two on a quick skim don't seem to relate to the subject.
Your original take: "Should have been: AI that attempts to predict people committing crimes"
Article 42. literally:
--- start quote ---
In line with the presumption of innocence, natural persons in the Union should always be judged on their actual behaviour. Natural persons should never be judged on AI-predicted behaviour based solely on their profiling, personality traits or characteristics, such as nationality, place of birth, place of residence, number of children, level of debt or type of car, without a reasonable suspicion of that person being involved in a criminal activity based on objective verifiable facts and without human assessment thereof.
Therefore, risk assessments carried out with regard to natural persons in order to assess the likelihood of their offending or to predict the occurrence of an actual or potential criminal offence based solely on profiling them or on assessing their personality traits and characteristics should be prohibited.
In any case, that prohibition does not refer to or touch upon risk analytics that are not based on the profiling of individuals or on the personality traits and characteristics of individuals, such as AI systems using risk analytics to assess the likelihood of financial fraud by undertakings on the basis of suspicious transactions or risk analytic tools to predict the likelihood of the localisation of narcotics or illicit goods by customs authorities, for example on the basis of known trafficking routes.
--- end quote ---
> Seems like it allows pretty easily for national states to add in laws that allow them to skirt around
Key missed point: "subject to the same cumulative conditions as referred to in paragraph 1."
Where paragraph 1 is "In the AI regulatory sandbox, personal data lawfully collected for other purposes may be processed solely for the purpose of developing, training and testing certain AI systems in the sandbox when all of the following conditions are met: ... list of conditions ..."
-----
In before "but governments can do whatever they want". Yes, they can, and they will. Does it mean we need to stop any and all legislation and regulation because "government will do what government will do"?
I think the EU has done better following its own rules than most other countries (not that it's perfect in any way).
Your original take: "Should have been: AI that attempts to predict people committing crimes"
Article 42. literally:
--- start quote ---
In line with the presumption of innocence, natural persons in the Union should always be judged on their actual behaviour. Natural persons should never be judged on AI-predicted behaviour based solely on their profiling, personality traits or characteristics, such as nationality, place of birth, place of residence, number of children, level of debt or type of car, without a reasonable suspicion of that person being involved in a criminal activity based on objective verifiable facts and without human assessment thereof.
Therefore, risk assessments carried out with regard to natural persons in order to assess the likelihood of their offending or to predict the occurrence of an actual or potential criminal offence based solely on profiling them or on assessing their personality traits and characteristics should be prohibited.
In any case, that prohibition does not refer to or touch upon risk analytics that are not based on the profiling of individuals or on the personality traits and characteristics of individuals, such as AI systems using risk analytics to assess the likelihood of financial fraud by undertakings on the basis of suspicious transactions or risk analytic tools to predict the likelihood of the localisation of narcotics or illicit goods by customs authorities, for example on the basis of known trafficking routes.
--- end quote ---
> Seems like it allows pretty easily for national states to add in laws that allow them to skirt around
Key missed point: "subject to the same cumulative conditions as referred to in paragraph 1."
Where paragraph 1 is "In the AI regulatory sandbox, personal data lawfully collected for other purposes may be processed solely for the purpose of developing, training and testing certain AI systems in the sandbox when all of the following conditions are met: ... list of conditions ..."
-----
In before "but governments can do whatever they want". Yes, they can, and they will. Does it mean we need to stop any and all legislation and regulation because "government will do what government will do"?
I think the EU has done better following its own rules than most other countries (not that it's perfect in any way).
It might be too little too late to stop the flood though: https://www.foxnews.com/us/tech-company-boasts-its-ai-can-pr...