Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
EU AI Facebook Slashdot.org

Meta Won't Offer Future Multimodal AI Models In EU (axios.com) 33

Posted by BeauHD from the uncertain-future dept.
According to Axios, Meta will withhold future multimodel AI models from customers in the European Union "due to the unpredictable nature of the European regulatory environment." From the report: Meta plans to incorporate the new multimodal models, which are able to reason across video, audio, images and text, in a wide range of products, including smartphones and its Meta Ray-Ban smart glasses. Meta says its decision also means that European companies will not be able to use the multimodal models even though they are being released under an open license. It could also prevent companies outside of the EU from offering products and services in Europe that make use of the new multimodal models. The company is also planning to release a larger, text-only version of its Llama 3 model soon. That will be made available for customers and companies in the EU, Meta said.

Meta's issue isn't with the still-being-finalized AI Act, but rather with how it can train models using data from European customers while complying with GDPR -- the EU's existing data protection law. Meta announced in May that it planned to use publicly available posts from Facebook and Instagram users to train future models. Meta said it sent more than 2 billion notifications to users in the EU, offering a means for opting out, with training set to begin in June. Meta says it briefed EU regulators months in advance of that public announcement and received only minimal feedback, which it says it addressed. In June -- after announcing its plans publicly -- Meta was ordered to pause the training on EU data. A couple weeks later it received dozens of questions from data privacy regulators from across the region.

The United Kingdom has a nearly identical law to GDPR, but Meta says it isn't seeing the same level of regulatory uncertainty and plans to launch its new model for U.K. users. A Meta representative told Axios that European regulators are taking much longer to interpret existing law than their counterparts in other regions. A Meta representative told Axios that training on European data is key to ensuring its products properly reflect the terminology and culture of the region.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Meta Won't Offer Future Multimodal AI Models In EU More

Meta Won't Offer Future Multimodal AI Models In EU

Comments Filter:

  • Generally speaking (Score:2, Insightful)

    by rsilvergun ( 571051 )
    If a software product is offered in the EU it's because it's doing some grade a privacy violations of the sort that would make you throw up a little in your mouth if you actually read the terms of service. It's kind of like how there are food additives banned in Mexico that are still available in the United States.
    • If they're going to pass on a large, highly lucrative market, it can only be because they're pretty sure they're going to get caught violating the law. If they thought they could get away with it, they wouldn't think twice.
  • So far these models are yet to prove their value. The only thing they are doing is consuming tons of energy with dubious results and leeching tons of data. Thanks but no thanks.

  • Not an open license (Score:3, Insightful)

    by innocent_white_lamb ( 151825 ) on Wednesday July 17, 2024 @06:26PM (#64633731)

    "Meta says its decision also means that European companies will not be able to use the multimodal models even though they are being released under an open license."

    So it's not an open license.

    • So it's not an open license.

      I doubt the license limits the distribution to non-EU countries. It's more likely Meta simply won't build out any bots from the source and offer them to EU users.

      • It says European companies cannot use them. I doubt Meta will try too hard to prevent somebody from "smuggling" the model into the EU. But if you wanted to sue them for breaching EU rules, you'll have a hard time since you're not allowed to use it there in the first place.

        • you'll have a hard time since you're not allowed to use it there in the first place.

          But then we're back to the original comment: it's not an open licence. Which is also what people in charge with such things say fact: https://opensource.org/blog/me... [opensource.org]

          The license for the Llama LLM is very plainly not an “Open Source” license. Meta is making some aspect of its large language model available to some, but not to everyone, and not for any purpose. -- Open Source Initiative

          This comment was made for the llama-2 licence https://ai.meta.com/llama/lice... [meta.com] but version 3 is same with more restrictions https://github.com/meta-llama/... [github.com] including an explicit list of what they don't allow, such as "promoting guns".

          • Fair enough, I agree it is not as open as some other licenses. On the other hand, making the model weights public and allowing its use for most purposes is a huge (probably multi-billion dollar) gift to most would-be users of it.
          • Well, you now seem to be saying the license is not an open source license just on it's own merits, not because of restrictions the EU is placing on Meta. Maybe you're right, but it's a different topic, somewhat. What I'm saying is that if the EU places restrictions on Meta, that doesn't alter any open source license terms.

            Besides all that, I think there is some significant chance of the EU demonizing open source because they lack the power to control it to the extent they'd wish. There is no CEO to threa

            • I think there is some significant chance of the EU demonizing open source because they lack the power to control it to the extent they'd wish.

              There is zero chance because of the scope of the EU. All EU does is to regulate services introduced on its market. If you or Meta operate a service accessible to EU residents or registered businesses, then regulations might apply. But the origin of the code used to power the services (whether it is proprietary or you got it from an open source repository) is entirely irrelevant for what the EU is able to regulate.

              There is no CEO to threaten and no company shares to weaken

              The EU is not able to threaten CEOs as it does not have penal law or operate criminal tribunal

            • If the EU Government says it is illegal in the EU, that doesn't affect its Open Source status.
              If Meta says you are not allowed to use it in the EU, that goes against section 5 of the Open Source Definition, and therefore makes it not Open Source.

  • That may change now they have a new party in government and one that certainly doesnt remember Meta's bought and for ex uk politician advisor fondly. But the chances are slim.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by mjwx ( 966435 )

      That may change now they have a new party in government and one that certainly doesnt remember Meta's bought and for ex uk politician advisor fondly. But the chances are slim.

      If anything the Starmer government will be far harder to buy.

      They've got far bigger fish to fry at the moment after 14 years of mismanagement, of which the ex-UK politician advisor you mentioned, Nick Clegg was part. Arguably the less destructive part but as deputy prime minister, he was neck deep in it.

  • And nothing of value was lost (Score:4, Insightful)

    by BeaverCleaver ( 673164 ) on Wednesday July 17, 2024 @09:19PM (#64634003)

    Props to the EU for telling Meta to shove it.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by mjwx ( 966435 )

      Props to the EU for telling Meta to shove it.

      Those evil Eurocrats... looking out for privacy and rights. Commenting mostly because of your sig... Video is almost the worst way to provide most information, not just technical.

      • Try uBlacklist to block video search results. I get a little bit of text at the top of the google search results saying something like 'uBlacklist has blocked 7 sites' and no youtube results. Theres a little link that puts them back in the results if you actually need them.

        • Try uBlacklist to block video search results. I get a little bit of text at the top of the google search results saying something like 'uBlacklist has blocked 7 sites' and no youtube results. Theres a little link that puts them back in the results if you actually need them.

          That's good info, thanks. I find it helps to use duckduckgo as my primary search engine, they have less incentive to push results from Youtube. I recently gave Google another try for a couple of searches that I hadn't had much success with. Damn, it's all just ads and SEO crap these days! I'll give uBlacklist a go some time...

      • Those euros really have their shit together. I'm seriously considering moving to an EU country, just need to work on the language skills :-)

        As for my sig, I actually ran into a validation of this rule when I was trying to install an aftermarket suspension kit on a bike trailer last week. There was NO manual available online. The only way was to follow their video. It sucked. Constantly trying to pause a video at just the right place (sucks on a phone's touch screen!), while balancing a half-assembled traile

Slashdot Top Deals

Never trust a computer you can't repair yourself.

Close