It’s a good read, but some of what is listed as “admirable regulation” are not necessarily so — but having that complex conversation is not possible in the current environment. But perhaps that’s what Ben’s getting at?
European values may be admirable but what matters is how they’re implemented. Principle without pragmatism paralyses. In trying to shield society from harm, Europe too often ends up shielding itself from progress.
…
There is a moral philosophy underlying Europe’s economic posture, a kind of deontological discipline that puts what should be done over what works. Privacy is sacred, big companies are suspicious, and consumer protection is gospel. These are not bad instincts. Indeed, in an age of data abuse and corporate overreach, they are often admirable. But good instincts aren’t enough – what matters is how they’re implemented. Principle without pragmatism paralyses. In trying to shield society from harm, Europe too often ends up shielding itself from progress.
Take the GDPR. It was an earnest and important attempt to protect citizens’ data – but also a compliance nightmare that ossified digital innovation. Or the AI Act – an ambitious attempt to make AI safe, ethical, and transparent. Laudable in theory, but in practice it risks choking startups with bureaucracy before they ever write a line of code. The EU will soon have 27 AI regulatory authorities but few leading AI companies.
Maybe it’s not the implementation, maybe it’s the concept of regulating it?
https://www.euractiv.com/opinion/europe-doesnt-lack-talent-it-lacks-boldness/
via:
Leave a Reply