Meta’s Chief AI Officer is lying about the EU AI Act
We recorded 3 claims from this post. 3 were checked against evidence. 2 more are held. Read the post at its source.
Claims from this post (3)
In the order they appear in the post. Each quotation is the speaker’s words in this post. A label such as “Supported” or “Can’t be checked” is the claim’s current assessment; its page has the evidence and the reasons.
Assessment: UnresolvedSaid
“But the big tech executives that would need to deal with it aren’t happy, and are doing their best after the fact to undermine a hard-won compromise that involved years of negotiations and multiple all-nighters.”
What we tested: Big tech executives are trying to undermine the newly negotiated EU AI Act compromise after the fact.
Assessment: SupportedSaid
“The phrase “Added late in the text” — which tries to paint the regulation of foundation models as some kind of sneaky last minute move — is a massive, massive misrepresentation.”
What we tested: Claiming that foundation model regulation was added late to the EU AI Act text is a major misrepresentation.
What happened: The May 2022 proposal contains general-purpose AI duties in Article 4b and expressly exempts smaller enterprises from them. Proposed regulation therefore existed well before December 2023, although this does not date every provision in the eventual agreement. (Council of the European Union, French Presidency; copy hosted by the Future of Life Institute, )
Assessment: ContradictedSaid
“It came in the middle of May 2022.”
What we tested: Foundation models (general purpose AI) were first mentioned in the EU AI Act process in mid-May 2022, before ChatGPT's release.
What happened: The November 2021 compromise text explicitly mentions general-purpose AI and contains a dedicated Article 52a. This predates the claimed first mention in May 2022. (Council of the European Union, Slovenian Presidency, )
Held from this post (2)
These records did not pass every check, so nothing about them is published. Held is not a finding.