Arxo says EU AI Act's Portuguese and Croatian texts add 'per second' to compute threshold
READ THE ORIGINAL SOURCEOpen original sourcewww.arxo.io · Opens in a new tabArxo reports that the Portuguese and Croatian versions of Article 51(2) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (AI Act) describe the 10^25 compute threshold as measured per second, while the other 22 language versions, including English, measure cumulative floating point operations without a time unit. Arxo says the added words do not fit the cumulative quantity described in the same paragraph, cites Recital 111 and Annex XIII(c), and proposes deleting the words. The record lists e-mails to the Council, Parliament and the European AI Office, with no responses recorded.
One primary source; other links are context, not independent corroboration.
- Primary sourceHacker News discovery · automated brief
- Discovery linkHacker News
- Linked in sourceRegulation (EU) 2024/1689 (Artificial Intelligence Act), Official Journal, 12 July 2024, Portuguese version
- Linked in source11c7f31fa5d9074f-oj.xhtml
- Linked in sourceRegulation (EU) 2024/1689 (Artificial Intelligence Act), Official Journal, 12 July 2024, Croatian version
- Linked in sourcecc5d2eaedfd7d4d9-oj.xhtml
- Linked in sourceRegulation (EU) 2024/1689 (Artificial Intelligence Act), Official Journal, 12 July 2024, English version
- Linked in source8f0b656302f9864c-en.xhtml
- Linked in sourceARXO-2026-0413.json
Grok Bot submitted the link. AINewsIQ fetched the primary source and prepared a source-based brief automatically. An editor has not reviewed the story; social attention and the brief do not independently verify its claims.
Open full article view →- Linked article+30
- Fetched source page+30
- No editor link review+0
- Original non-discussion link+5
This measures the stored source trail and editorial steps. It does not certify accuracy, peer review, or independent corroboration. Popularity adds no points.
View full scoring →Read the scoring rubric →What the source says
Arxo reports that the Portuguese and Croatian versions of Article 51(2) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (AI Act) describe the 10^25 compute threshold as measured per second, while the other 22 language versions, including English, measure cumulative floating point operations without a time unit. Arxo says the added words do not fit the cumulative quantity described in the same paragraph, cites Recital 111 and Annex XIII(c), and proposes deleting the words. The record lists e-mails to the Council, Parliament and the European AI Office, with no responses recorded.
A READER'S EVIDENCE CHECKHow to read this signalSix questions about claims, sources, risks, and open checks
This is a signal-level guide until claim-level evidence is available. “Not recorded” means the evidence has not been assessed here; it does not mean a result is false. How we check AI news →
- 01Who is making each claim?
The claimant and whether each claim was measured or asserted are not recorded in this public brief.
- 02What was actually tested?
Not recorded per claim. Check the source for sample size, tasks, model and benchmark versions, and reproducibility.
- 03Where are the sources?
Original link: www.arxo.io. Brief basis: fetched source page. Primary page date and quote locations are not established in this panel.
- 04What could mislead?
Source claims not independently checked; the record notes no institutional response as of its last check.
- 05What is at risk if wrong?
Not assessed per claim. Consider safety, privacy, cost, and adoption decisions before relying on the result.
- 06What would change the view?
No claim-specific check is recorded. An inspectable primary method or independent replication could change the assessment.
Key findings from the stored brief
- Portuguese and Croatian versions of Article 51(2) add 'per second' to the 10^25 threshold.
- The other 22 language versions measure cumulative floating point operations without a time unit.
- Arxo's hypothetical example: 2×10^25 operations over a million seconds equals 2×10^19 operations per second.
Source claims not independently checked; the record notes no institutional response as of its last check.
This is a source-based abstract, not independent validation of the source's claims.
Evidence & sources
These links show where the signal came from and what the source page linked to. A linked page is context, not independent corroboration.
Grok Bot submitted the link. AINewsIQ fetched the primary source and prepared a source-based brief automatically. An editor has not reviewed the story; social attention and the brief do not independently verify its claims.
These are Grok Bot discovery notes. AINewsIQ prepared a brief from available source material. The bot's rationale, linked posts, authors, and stances have not been independently verified.
Arxo says the Portuguese and Croatian language versions of EU AI Act Article 51(2) express the 10^25 systemic-risk compute threshold per second rather than as a cumulative total, and recommends deleting those words. Arxo's own finding, last checked Oct 31.
Source claims not independently checked; the record notes no institutional response as of its last check.
Engagement counts, when shown, are observed snapshots. They do not establish accuracy or corroboration.
- hn post ↗ · 5 points, 0 comments · observed 11/1/2026, 10:59:15 AM
Timeline & updates
- Signal dated by source or discovery feed
This timestamp places the signal in the radar. It may be the discovery post date rather than the primary page's first publication date.
- Shared brief stored
AINewsIQ prepared one abstract from fetched source page.
A publication revision history is not stored for this signal. New engagement snapshots do not mean the source itself changed.
Why this may matter
If accurate, the wording discrepancy could cause differing readings of when a general-purpose AI model is presumed to have systemic risk across EU language versions. Resolution would depend on the co-legislators' corrigendum procedure.
Limits and open questions
Source claims not independently checked; the record notes no institutional response as of its last check.
Organization-specific financial, security, and operational effects require the organization's own context and review.
Discussion
Comments are reviewed before publication. Discuss the evidence, not the person.
No published comments yet.
Reader discussion opens with accounts. You can read the original source and published comments now.