#ai-regulation

#ai-regulation

While the lack of federal regulation in the U.S. presents a loose framework for AI, it contrasts with Europe’s stricter data and privacy laws, increasing calls for transparency and safety.

Elon Musk's Optimus demo at Tesla's We Robot event made one thing clear: when it comes to humanoids, the spotlight still belongs to the United States.

Europe is heading down the wrong path on AI. This code introduces a number of legal uncertainties for model developers, as well as measures which go far beyond the scope of the AI Act.

Henna Virkkunen, the EU Commission's Executive Vice-President for Tech Sovereignty, argued that the AI Liability Directive would have led to fragmented rules across EU member states.

In many ways, it's too early to tell where the AI wave will take us - we've only seen a fraction of its capabilities so far, which is equal parts exciting and terrifying.

Trump's executive order requires any AI company hoping to contract with the federal government to prove their AI systems are 'truth-seeking' based on historical accuracy.

Even when the legislation emerges, a major concern is that the government is committed to a domain-specific approach to the regulation of AI.

The AI Infrastructure directive addresses energy and permitting issues associated with data centers and the computational demands of running AI applications, requiring the Department of Energy to issue RFPs.

Every product leader used to brag about how quickly they could ship their product. However, with the rise of new regulations, today's top PMs brag about their ability to ship fast while also showing their work, dataset lineage, bias tests, and audit hooks before any code reaches production.

This compromise is terrible. It's actually worse than the original.

The part of the bill of most interest to the tech industry was its provision for a moratorium on state-level regulation of AI, which would have rendered all AI regulation that didn't come from the federal government unenforceable for 10 years.

"State and local governments should have the right to protect their residents against harmful technology and hold the companies responsible to account," said Jonathan Walter, a senior policy adviser at The Leadership Conference's Center for Civil Rights.

"While I appreciate Chairman Cruz's efforts to find acceptable language that allows states to protect their citizens from the abuses of AI, the current language is not acceptable to those who need these protections the most."

"While I appreciate Chairman Cruz's efforts to find acceptable language that allows states to protect their citizens from the abuses of AI, the current language is not acceptable to those who need those provisions the most."

The provision to the reconciliation bill was introduced by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX). Many prominent Silicon Valley executives were in favor of the so-called "AI moratorium," which they said would prevent states from forming an unworkable patchwork of regulation that could stifle AI innovation.

The proposal to ban states from regulating AI for a decade risks undermining protection against AI harms and reducing accountability for powerful tech firms.

"With the passage of this first-in-the-state legislation, we are putting corporate landlords on notice: if you're using software like RealPage to coordinate rent hikes, you're breaking the law - and now, tenants and the city have the tools to hold you accountable."