EU Parliament Blocks AI Features Over Cyber, Privacy Fears (politico.eu) 47
An anonymous reader shares a report: The European Parliament has disabled AI features on the work devices of lawmakers and their staff over cybersecurity and data protection concerns, according to an internal email seen by POLITICO. The chamber emailed its members on Monday to say it had disabled "built-in artificial intelligence features" on corporate tablets after its IT department assessed it couldn't guarantee the security of the tools' data.
"Some of these features use cloud services to carry out tasks that could be handled locally, sending data off the device," the Parliament's e-MEP tech support desk said in the email. "As these features continue to evolve and become available on more devices, the full extent of data shared with service providers is still being assessed. Until this is fully clarified, it is considered safer to keep such features disabled."
"Some of these features use cloud services to carry out tasks that could be handled locally, sending data off the device," the Parliament's e-MEP tech support desk said in the email. "As these features continue to evolve and become available on more devices, the full extent of data shared with service providers is still being assessed. Until this is fully clarified, it is considered safer to keep such features disabled."
Good (Score:5, Insightful)
This should be the default on all devices. AI features should be a selectable add-on.
Re: Good (Score:1)
But why are they just now doing this?
They're way ahead of everyone else! (Score:4, Informative)
It's not like the apps have been around for long at all. Most of the general public freebie "AI" tools have been built as web based so far.
Re: They're way ahead of everyone else! (Score:2)
For comparison, I changed jobs (both in cybersecurity) within months of chatpgt being a thing, and to my recollection, both teams I was on quickly moved to block it completely. The first in the health care sector, the second in aerospace.
Sure, government moves slower, but...this is waaay slower. As for when AI features started showing up on devices...where I'm at now, we never even allowed them to become a thing. As these were introduced, there has always been a means of administratively disabling them. In
Re: (Score:1)
probably to prevent accidental leaks of their dirty games. anyway, as the selective release of epstein manure has shown there is plenty of intentional leaking without ai being involved.
Re: (Score:3)
But why are they just now doing this?
No governmental body can keep pace with technological change. Honestly, it's shocking that they've managed to react this quickly.
Re: Good (Score:2)
Because three quarters of people would disable AI on everything from day 1.
I'll see you and raise... (Score:5, Interesting)
There ought to be a "one switch" law: Cut off all on-device AI features with a single switch.
If you want to pick and choose, use some, not others, OK, that's on you, you can't use the switch.
But if you just want it all off, you shouldn't have to continuously pore through arcane and poorly-named menus looking to find where the tech bros have wormed it in, or turned it back on with an update.
One switch. I want it off. All of it.
Re: I'll see you and raise... (Score:2)
It's not about moral panic, nor about "the children".
It's about restoring agency and control to the person who OWNS the device, and who's paying the tech-bros' salaries, by the only reliable means possible.
What, would you rely on some company's PROMISE?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why would you need a regulation to say such a thing? What possible purpose could it serve? Are you suggesting that because they didn't vote to confirm this now men can get pregnant? Without knowing what the proposal actually was, or even if it exists outside some bigot's imagination, I suspect that this was part of some wider amendment designed to bake bigotry into regulation. They included that particular clause so that when it inevitsbly got voted down they could cite this to make it seem silly
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
MEN CANNOT GET PREGNANT.
If people like you didn't treat trans people like shit then they would probably mostly call themselves trans men and trans women instead of insisting being referred to as just men and women. But since they get targeted by clowns who freak out over shit that doesn't affect their lives they have to do this for self-defense. It is you and yours that are the problem here but your heads are way too far up your collective assholes for you to realize it.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: Treat EU legislators like 12 year olds (Score:2)
You don't get to use woke ("aware of systemic injustice") as an insult and also call other people hateful. Your entire world view is literally built around fear and hate.
Re: (Score:2)
When you think men can get pregnant, consistency will be the least of your personal problems.
Re: Treat EU legislators like 12 year olds (Score:2)
Keep crying, clown. We'll all keep laughing at your delicious Reich Wing tears.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
MEN CANNOT GET PREGNANT.
That's not the issue. If men can't get pregnant anyway, why pour it into law? Would there ever be a need to fine a man for becoming pregnant? What sense would it make to legalize an universal speed limit to 299,768,459 meters per second? Who would you ever penalize for breaching lightspeed?
Re: (Score:1)
Because otherwise you erase women.
In the EU, a man in a dress is now, legally, a woman.
And people are obliged by law to treat him as if he can have babies.
UTTER MADNESS.
Re: (Score:2)
baked fact-denying woke lunacy into regulation.
I don't think they did. If you check the original tweet reporting "EU parliament rejects the sentence, only women can get pregnant" https://x.com/TomaszFroelich/s... [x.com] you will notice it refers to text A10-0010/2026, "Recommendation to the Council on EU priorities for the 70th session of the UN Commission on the Status of Women".
The report contains the following sentence https://www.europarl.europa.eu... [europa.eu] :
(y) emphasise the importance of the full recognition of trans women as women, noting that their inclusion is essential for the effectiveness of any gender-equality and anti-violence policies; call for recognition of and equal access for trans women to protection and support services;
In short:
* There is no change in EU regulation or legislation. They voted on a report about suggestions t
Re: (Score:2)
It was an amendment. That stated a fact. And was defeated:
"A proposed amendment stating that “only biological women can become pregnant” was rejected after 233 MEPs voted against it, with 200 for and 107 abstentions."
Any victory for lies over truth is to be mourned by all remaining people with the sense to defy mind-bogglingly stupid fashion.
Re: (Score:2)
It was an amendment.
I know it's an amendment, it's amendment 12 after recital C, you can check the text in the following link by selecting the document "010-018" https://portal.assisteu.eu/eur... [assisteu.eu]
That stated a fact. And was defeated:
Of course it was, because it served no purpose there. It was inserted in the Recitals ("Whereas ..." section) which support and explain the following decisions. The fact that "only women can get pregnant" does not support any of the decisions that were contained in this text.
Maybe it could have been useful, for example, in a law that
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Treat EU legislators like 12 year olds (Score:5, Insightful)
The EU parliament is also one of few legislative entities in the Western world that care about consumer protection. I don't agree with everything it produces, but that doesn't mean they're always wrong. Although twelve year olds tend to think in such absolutes.
Re:Treat EU legislators like 12 year olds (Score:5, Informative)
After looking further into this, it was indeed an amendment put in by bigots to try and wreck a piece of legislation they don't agree with but know they are in the minority on. The legislation was to cement recognition of trans women as women, and trans men as men. This amendment could have been used to bypass this because if passed, then if a trans man can get pregnant they would be a women not a man and this could then also be used to argue the vice-versa. It was an attempt to scupper a vote they were going to lose by making the legislation unworkable and was rejected on that basis.
Re: (Score:2)
Could have been used ?!
FUCK THAT.
This laughable law IS being used to PUT THE DENIAL OF BIOLOGICAL FACTS INTO EUROPEAN LAW.
It used to be that the left would fight for the facts against religious right-wing nutters.
Woke lunacy has turned that 180 degrees.
WAKE UP !
MEN CANNOT GET PREGNANT and you are have lost every fact-based argument if you think they can.
Re: (Score:1)
Settle down grandpa, isn't it time for Matlock and some sleepy time tea?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Bigoted scum like you lost the argument. In a Democratic Society, you get your way by winning the argument and then winning the vote. But your side didn't manage that. You lost, because the majority of people think your bigotry is laughable at best and should make you a pariah in any civilised Society.. And because your side lost the argument and the vote, they turned to underhanded tactics to try and get thier way anyway, undemocratically. But the civilised side isn't stupid and so noticed this underhanded
Re: (Score:2)
Oops, a civilized hateful woke cunt.
Enjoy the baby squeezing out of your prick, you demented piece of shit.
Re:Treat EU legislators like 12 year olds (Score:5, Insightful)
Bigots sure do think about trans people a lot...
Not interested in AI (Score:3)
I really wonder where they got my Email address and name...
Re: (Score:2)
Report spam to spamcop.net
Re: (Score:2)
Does SpamCop really work? SpamCop said many of my reported spams are from bytedance.com, but I still get many spams from there. :(
Ban Microsoft and Apple from the EU (Score:3)
Linux needs to be treated like public civil engineering at this point, as private companies shouldn't be beta testing on the public. AI is the asbestos of the internet at this point, just shut this shit down.
Yes this is a rant, but Microslop is wasting trillions of dollars on AI garbage.
Sensible move (Score:4, Insightful)
Stop using "cyber" for everything (Score:2)
For that matter, stop using "Crypto" for everything too.
There are too many things which begin with those roots.
When I see "cyber" the first thing I think of is "wanna cyber?" Therefore any time someone says "cyber" it's unprofessional AF as I think "who the fuck is this baby child who doesn't know shit".
Re: Stop using "cyber" for everything (Score:1)
Cyber means of and relating to computers.
Normal people don't sexualize everything, let alone have their head stuck in IRC circa 1996. The world stopped asking "ASL?" to every stranger they meet on the internet a very long time ago, it's time for you to catch up.
Re: (Score:2)
Normal people don't sexualize everything
Oh look, in addition to all the other fucked up things about you, you're a puritan.
Re: Stop using "cyber" for everything (Score:1)
The reason you find it jarring that somebody would ever use cyber in a non-sexual context is because you do things like insert PCB headers, mice, and keyboards into your anus for pleasure. Thus, in your head and your head only, it's highly sexually charged.
That one does not typically associate the word "cyber" with "sex" does not make one a puritan. It simply means that people have to watch their computer when you're around.
Pentest and security assessment (Score:1)