Marco Event Notes

The EU’s new Commission is looking to approve a new AI directive, and of course democratic participation is important to ensure a good law. What do you feel necessary from EU to participate?

Human centered internet is not defined, that’s why you can’t find a solution. “Human” is literally anyone.

Can we think of counterproductive regulation on the Internet? Stuff like the copyright directive? how did we end up with all these things, that used to be a public good, end up being someone’s property?

I agree with the antitrust principle. What we consider AI is machine learning, this is the root of our problems, it’s just classical statistics. You create the illusion that value production is shifted to the generation…. ex. if the doctor establish a relation with the patient, the AI has not to invade the relation, but now the doctor has to take notes and patient see less value in it (you look somewhere else and you are centralised…).

Airport before and after Ryanair: before architecture were associated to functions and your experience of travels, room for different functions. Now with the low cost you consider that the experience is less valuable, now is a shopping mall and at the gate it’s temporarily informations about space.

medicine is not diagnosis, but prognosis-based. In medicine, nothing has value if I cannot improve your life. A patient can and should negotiate with the doctor where to go from here; he or she even has a right to die. This is a very poor fit for how ML-on-big-data works.

Do we actually need AI? Why are we pushing for AI?

I just read a review of 37,000 studies of AI in medicine. Of these, only about 100 had enough information on training datasets to do a meta-analysis on. Of these, 24 claimed prospective design (the algorithm had been trained without knowing the real data); of these zero had actually done prospective design.
… I don’t know any real medical problem that prospective AI model can solve.

Where do we bring the democratic process into new models?