EU Better at regulation than innovation

"The only issue I have is, why are the UK still not only following that protectionist and risk-averse model but appear to be going beyond the EU's straightjacket where regulation is concerned. When we have the chairman of Microsoft the other week clearly trying to play the UK off its Brexit freedom by claiming the EU "is a better place to do business than the UK".
---------------------------------------
There are times when we must not allow EU skepticism and Brexit fundamentalism to take over sense and intelligence.  There are situations where we should not dismiss and vilify the EU just for the sake of it or just because it is the EU.  In the case of AI, why don't we consider the risks of AI instead of vilifying the EU for doing so?

We must be extra careful about the limits we are prepared to breach.  Artificial Intelligence replaces human intelligence.  It demands that we be selective and discerning as to its application because it has the potential to render hundreds of millions of human beings completely unproductive and so disposable.  Doing so requires regulation because nobody can expect proponents of AI to self-regulate.

AI may improve productivity but the flip side of it is that it displaces workers and ultimately, puts entire sectors and industries under the complete control of a select few.  An IT project manager friend of mine and his entire team of almost 70 people lost their jobs in a well known blue-chip IT company to AI.  Now, they even find it difficult to get past "online employment agents" that -- apparently -- only uses key words and filters online resumes by surname.

What about security and social manipulation via AI?  No wonder, even rocket man Elon Musk is terrified of it.  But at the end of the day, it's one thing for robotics to replace human physical capabilities particularly in heavy industries.  But it's another thing to replace human intelligence with computers.  The latter demands regulation.  And more regulation, if need be.

The EU and the UK (if, indeed, it is aligning with the EU on this) should be applauded, not criticised, for being sensible and for taking extra care in dealing with this so called innovation.

So, what if they are protectionist trade barriers?

The issue about protectionist trade barriers is on which side of the barrier you stand.  The EU protects its side of the barrier.  The UK protect its side of the barrier.  Isn't that the case?

I also concede the current European fighter plane (UK involved too) is better than the F-35 or F-16.

USA corporate cronyism has put them back a step, IMO.

I am in total agreement.  Regrettably, though, co-operation with the EU goes completely against the most fundamental principle of and the most powerful driving force behind Brexit; so the chances of the idea filtering through to the mindset of Brexit supporters is nil.

Co-operation with the EU is the antithesis of Brexit.  Working with the EU or a close relationship with the EU would be regarded as betrayal of Brexit.   And IMO, this is where, why and how Brexit fails the UK.  Brexit is a triumph of nationalistic sentiment over pragmatic ideals.  (By Brexit, I mean, this Brexit we're going through now or Johnson's version of Brexit.)   

Here's an example of what I'm talking about: "Fuck off. Britain is world beating. Britain has been leading the world in scientific advances for decades - we're the greatest nation in the world. France is useless. And most of Europe is also nowhere. It was always Britain. It's such a pity that most people in this country are so ignorant of our incredible achievements."

I am afraid that steppenwolf is living in the past

The United Kingdom no longer makes either commercial airoplanes or cutting edge, world beating fighter aircraft, the next generation of Britains frontline fighter aircraft will be made by a European joint enterprise.

Our pride of the Royal Navy, and the largest Aircraft Carrier outside the US Navy was built using Anglo-French co-operation.

Sir Tim Benners Lee is labeled as the man who invented the Internet, and he invented it as a result of work carried out by the European Organisation for Nuclear Research in Switzerland.

Of the two Covid19 vaccines created with British scientists, both were done jointly with Europe, one with Sweden, the other with France.

The world in the near future is going to consist of economic super powers, and the United Kingdom is not going to be amongst them. The United States, China and the European Union will have the resources to compete with each other, and with India, the other fast emerging economic power. We on the other hand will have to rely on either Europe or the United States.

Fine, I'll rephrase and expound:  At this relatively early stage, Artificial Intelligence already supplants, supersedes, replaces humans in the work environment.  

OK. So, you don't like Elon Musk and you say he's not clever.  What about Stephen Hawking then? I know he's already dead but before his death, he did sign the same letter that Musk signed warning of the risks and dangers of Artificial Intelligence.  

Oh and regarding Sir Tim Berners-Lee, the man who invented HTTP, HTML and websites yes, he went to CERN in Switzerland.
Switzerland is not in the EU.

But Tim Berners-Lee did not invent the internet, his inventions just utilise it.
The internet was developed from DARPA's ARPANET in the USA (a US military project to create a computer network that would survive nuclear war).

Vint Cerf and Bob Khan in 1974 who created TCP/IP, they are the fathers of the modern internet.
And they created it outside the EU.

You don't have to be in that little cul de sac of nations to create stuff of global interest.