“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.”
Our reading, the sentence that was checked:
Claiming that foundation model regulation was added late to the EU AI Act text is a major misrepresentation.
Assessment: Supported Evidence as of
Where and when Gary Marcus wrote it
Marcus on AI, Meta’s Chief AI Officer is lying about the EU AI Act, paragraph 4.
- Said
- Source observed
- live page, full text, public
- Evidence as of
- the cutoff for this assessment
- Assessment recorded
- assessment marcus-metas-chief-ai-officer-is-lying-about-8864b2-a1
We recorded 3 claims from this post. See every claim from this post.
The wording above is the version this site observed on 2026-10-29. The source may have been edited after 2023-12-12. This page does not claim the wording was captured then.
What the claim commits to
- Kind
- Observation
- Deadline, as the speaker wrote it
- None stated. This site does not add one.
- Deadline state when assessed
- No horizon
- Deadline state on 2026-10-29
- No horizon (the release’s reference date)
From the speaker
- Added late in the text
- regulation of foundation models
- some kind of sneaky last minute move
- a massive, massive misrepresentation
Our interpretation
- Marcus explicitly explains late as a last-minute addition around the December 2023 agreement. The testable core is whether broad general-purpose AI regulation had appeared substantially earlier.
- The target period covers the legislative process from the April 2021 proposal through the December 12, 2023 post.
- Following Marcus's stated scope, general-purpose AI provisions count as relevant predecessors to foundation-model regulation. They need not contain every obligation in the eventual agreement.
- The assessment concerns chronology, not whether LeCun intended to deceive or whether massive is a measurable degree of error.
Counts as supported if: Dated negotiating texts contain substantive proposed requirements for general-purpose AI well before the final December 2023 negotiations.
Counts as contradicted if: The relevant broad regulatory provisions first appeared only during the final December negotiations, with earlier texts containing no substantive proposed duties.
Retrospective: these criteria were written after the outcome was public.
Current assessment
Was it true for the period described?
Outcome: Supported
The dated evidence matches what the claim committed to, under the criteria frozen before grading.
Scored on a plain reading. The speaker named no measure for this claim, so it was judged on the reading an informed reader would take, stated below under our interpretation. Both reviews had to find that reading fair.
- Evidence as of
- Deadline state when assessed
- No horizon
- Assessment recorded
- Policy version
- 2026-10-28.7
Rationale
Marcus's explicit chronological point holds: broad regulation of general-purpose AI was not first proposed at the last minute in December 2023. The French Presidency's May 13, 2022 text already proposed duties and exemptions. This supports his stated last-minute reading. It does not establish that every final foundation-model obligation existed then, or that LeCun's full statement was knowingly false.
Limitations
- The result depends on Marcus's explicit interpretation of late as last-minute.
- The cited text is a negotiating proposal, not enacted law.
- General-purpose AI provisions in 2022 do not establish the introduction dates of all later model-specific provisions.
Evidence (1 item)
Supports the claim: Council of the European Union, French Presidency; copy hosted by the Future of Life Institute,
Requirements and obligations for general purpose AI systems laid down in Article 4b shall not apply to micro, small and medium-sized enterprises.
Why it matters here: 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.
- Where
- Council document 9029/22, page 7, proposed Article 55a(3); related duties in Article 4b on page 5
- Publisher
- Council of the European Union, French Presidency; copy hosted by the Future of Life Institute
- Kind of source
- Regulatory filing
- Describes events of
- Public from
Where it was said (1)
Said once in the sources this register covers.
: Marcus on AI, Meta’s Chief AI Officer is lying about the EU AI Act
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.
- Where
- paragraph 4
- Published
- 2023-12-12
- Source observed
- , live page
- Access
- full text, public
History
Assessment versions
- Assessment marcus-metas-chief-ai-officer-is-lying-about-8864b2-a1: Current. Outcome: Supported. Evidence as of 2026-10-28. Public date not recorded.
Recorded events
Assessment publishedBy this site
First assessment published after both reviews and the final-text check passed.
About assessment marcus-metas-chief-ai-officer-is-lying-about-8864b2-a1.