In the vein of “another good point” made in public reactions to the statement, an article I read in The Telegraph:
“Big tech’s faux warnings should be taken with a pinch of salt, for incumbent players have a vested interest in barriers to entry. Oppressive levels of regulation make for some of the biggest. For large companies with dominant market positions, regulatory overkill is manageable; costly compliance comes with the territory. But for new entrants it can be a killer.”
This seems obvious with hindsight as one factor at play, but I hadn’t considered it before reading it here. This doesn’t address Daniel / Haydn’s point though, of course.
In the vein of “another good point” made in public reactions to the statement, an article I read in The Telegraph:
“Big tech’s faux warnings should be taken with a pinch of salt, for incumbent players have a vested interest in barriers to entry. Oppressive levels of regulation make for some of the biggest. For large companies with dominant market positions, regulatory overkill is manageable; costly compliance comes with the territory. But for new entrants it can be a killer.”
This seems obvious with hindsight as one factor at play, but I hadn’t considered it before reading it here. This doesn’t address Daniel / Haydn’s point though, of course.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/06/04/worry-climate-change-not-artificial-intelligence/