Not trying to be dismissive here but a lawyer will always edit your proposal. I do think lawyers will persist but not as many. And they will work very differently, much like we already use claude / codex to code - a big part of the contract probably won't be read by the lawyer.

I would rather argue they SPECIFICALLY will read everything. However, they'll likely often just be like "I'd phrase this differently but that works, too".

Have you watched Nathan for you? There is a lawyer that didn’t read on tv. And almost got in trouble.

I think the argument goes, even if 90% of a lawyers markups aren't useful, the 10% that are, are basically what you're paying them for.

No it does not. There's a lot of gold plating happening at the national level that goes beyond EU regulations. It's EU regulations + 27 national regulations in reality. The EU economies are still too different and the population too unwilling to have a truly US-style single market.

EU has two main legal instruments, regulations and directives. One applies directly, the other needs to be transposed into national law which indeed often ends with gold plating, but the tool is there to give uniform legislation- if all countries agree.

In addition there are plenty of technical standards which are agreed in expert committees, and these too apply directly. I'd expect Canada would join at least those technical processes and the two sides align technical standards over time.

What exactly is the difference between that and 50 states having their own regulations?

The absence of a central bank.

You seems to be arguing that a U.S. style single-market would be an improvement.

But for whom, people or companies?

It's an improvement for the economy and that mainly benefits the shareholders. How you redistribute those gains more broadly is an open question. But keeping inefficiencies in place to protect workers at all costs is a losing strategy in the long term - see: Soviet Union.

Unsurprisingly, people in different parts of the world hold different values. Europe is generally more focused on actual people and how their lives live, than simply accumulation of wealth among the few. It is unsurprising that they focus on different things.

That's easier said than done when you are competing in a global economy. The US is actually getting more consistent here: It starts to become more isolationist (through the trade war and specifically tariffs) and as a result will have more leeway in choosing their own mix of workers rights, compensations, taxation, etc. Sidenote: Of course consumers will be worse off as a result.

The EU however is in this weird spot where they are pushing for a more integrated global economy (thanks to all kinds of trade deals) with fewer barriers while at the same time making their own companies less competitive with all these regulations and internal hurdles: There are examples where a German exporter had an easier time sending his stuff to New Zealand than France.

Thanks for replying to a comment I didn't make. It is clear that your mind is full of American exceptionalism, I'm done in this comment thread. Thanks for your contribution.

FYI: I'm European and worried about our competitiveness. It appears you didn't get my point. You can have different values like you said but then you have to be consistent with this on all levels to make it work. And that means less EU integration into the global economy - the EU doesn't have a clear vision where it wants to go.

> In experiments spanning robotics, control of physical processes, and computer vision, the new method consistently satisfied the required constraints while identifying better solutions than existing techniques.

I guess this method works when you can precisely quantify the allowed output - like the degrees an arm can move or the path a robot can take, etc. But it doesn't appear to be applicable to an AI writing code - which is where our main concerns currently are.

Just like kids eventually take over most of the daily tasks for their parents (for people in countries where you don't have any kind of retirement fund and assisted living, etc.). Same will happen here - on one hand because the human population keeps growing older without any replacement and on the other because all the new tech will be too complicated for humans to understand.

AI can be progressing rapidly and valuations of OpenAI and Anthropic can decline at the same time. In fact I would say that's actually the default scenario. If AI really advances rapidly then it will be quickly moot which company developped which model at what time - since AI will be largely progressing on its own.

These blog posts often allude that the EU regulatory bodies are just slightly incompetent or short-sighted and these fragmented national models happen by accident. But unfortunately that's not the case: The EU pretends to be a single-market and almost mantra-like the EU officials keep repeating it. But the fact of the matter is that there is neither a single market nor is the European public ready for one. If there was a true single market (like the US has one) - then this would very quickly lead to massive changes in the labour market. Imagine all the Romanian construction companies suddenly building office buildings in Madrid. Or countless Polish architects suddenly undercutting the much more expensive architects in Milano. Whether they know it or not, Europeans would like to have all the benefits of a single market (mostly more competitive pricing) without any of the downsides (massive labour shifts) - but that option doesn't exist. So what they do is harmonize regulation for a few big corporations, while all the smaller companies (and their employees) still get to keep their national moats.

>The EU pretends to be a single-market and almost mantra-like the EU officials keep repeating it. But the fact of the matter is that there is neither a single market nor is the European public ready for one.

There are several comments suggesting the EU did everything right and member states tanked it but this just feels like the EU operating as intended. The EU is comprised of sovereign nations. This is a normal outcome of what is essentially a P2P network. The central authority is illusory because the EU is not sovereign.

I've recently started using codex for most of my coding. Haven't looked back so far: It seems to reason deeper about the code it writes and has much less downtime.

this looks just like x402 by Coinbase which enables stablecoin payments. but instead of transacting in dollars it tries to revive the idea that btc can be used as an actual means for payment rather than just speculation.