Europe is making headlines with a groundbreaking agreement to regulate artificial intelligence (AI). This isn’t just any agreement; This is a first-of-its-kind initiative to implement regulatory oversight of AI technologies, including popular generative AI services such as ChatGPT. These technologies are much more than buzzwords; They change our lives, but they cause serious anxiety.

The European Union reached a preliminary political agreement on the Artificial Intelligence Law after intense negotiations. This law is very important because it will set clear rules for the use of artificial intelligence, making the EU the first continent to do so. The deal resulted in hours of debate and a fierce battle, with key issues such as generative artificial intelligence and police use of facial recognition.

Interestingly, the details of the law are still somewhat unclear. It will come into force at least in 2025, and some improvements still need to be made. It seems that Europe, which took the lead in 2021, is trying to set a global standard with this move. However, due to the rapid growth of generative AI, they had to update their plans.

It’s not just about setting the rules; It refers to the risks posed by artificial intelligence, such as job losses, privacy violations and even threats to human life. The EU is setting a precedent for the world, and other major players such as the US, UK and China are also taking action with their own proposals to regulate AI.

One of the most important aspects of the EU Artificial Intelligence Law is its focus on underlying models, the complex systems behind services such as ChatGPT. These models, based on large amounts of internet data, can create new content, unlike traditional artificial intelligence. The law aims to tighten controls, especially on cutting-edge models that pose significant risks.

The debate around AI facial recognition has been particularly difficult. European lawmakers have called for a blanket ban on public use due to privacy concerns, while member states have pushed for exceptions for serious crimes. In the end, a compromise was found that balanced privacy and security needs.