California's Governor Just Vetoed Its Controversial AI Bill (techcrunch.com) 21
"California Governor Gavin Newsom has vetoed SB 1047, a high-profile bill that would have regulated the development of AI," reports TechCrunch.
The bill "would have made companies that develop AI models liable for implementing safety protocols to prevent 'critical harms'."
The rules would only have applied to models that cost at least $100 million and use 10^26 FLOPS (floating point operations, a measure of computation) during training.
SB 1047 was opposed by many in Silicon Valley, including companies like OpenAI, high-profile technologists like Meta's chief AI scientist Yann LeCun, and even Democratic politicians such as U.S. Congressman Ro Khanna. That said, the bill had also been amended based on suggestions by AI company Anthropic and other opponents.
In a statement about today's veto, Newsom said, "While well-intentioned, SB 1047 does not take into account whether an AI system is deployed in high-risk environments, involves critical decision-making or the use of sensitive data. Instead, the.." bill applies stringent standards to even the most basic functions — so long as a large system deploys it. I do not believe this is the best approach to protecting the public from real threats posed by the technology."
"Over the past 30 days, Governor Newsom signed 17 bills covering the deployment and regulation of GenAI technology..." according to a statement from the governor's office, "cracking down on deepfakes, requiring AI watermarking, protecting children and workers, and combating AI-generated misinformation... The Newsom Administration will also immediately engage academia to convene labor stakeholders and the private sector to explore approaches to use GenAI technology in the workplace."
In a separate statement the governor pointed out California " is home to 32 of the world's 50 leading Al companies," and warned that the bill "could give the public a false sense of security about controlling this fast-moving technology. Smaller, specialized models may emerge as equally or even more dangerous than the models targeted by SB 1047 — at the potential expense of curtailing the very innovation that fuels advancement in favor of the public good..."
"While well-intentioned, SB 1047 does not take into account whether an AI system is deployed in high-risk environments, involves critical decision-making or the use of sensitive data. Instead, the bill applies stringent standards to even the most basic functions — so long as a large system deploys it.
"I do not believe this is the best approach to protecting the public from real threats posed by the technology."
Interestingly, the Los Angeles Times reported that the vetoed bill had been supported by Mark Hamill, J.J. Abrams, and "more than 125 Hollywood actors, directors, producers, music artists and entertainment industry leaders" who signed a letter of support. (And that bill also cited the support of "over a hundred current and former employees of OpenAI, Google DeepMind, Anthropic, Meta, and xAI..."
SB 1047 was opposed by many in Silicon Valley, including companies like OpenAI, high-profile technologists like Meta's chief AI scientist Yann LeCun, and even Democratic politicians such as U.S. Congressman Ro Khanna. That said, the bill had also been amended based on suggestions by AI company Anthropic and other opponents.
In a statement about today's veto, Newsom said, "While well-intentioned, SB 1047 does not take into account whether an AI system is deployed in high-risk environments, involves critical decision-making or the use of sensitive data. Instead, the.." bill applies stringent standards to even the most basic functions — so long as a large system deploys it. I do not believe this is the best approach to protecting the public from real threats posed by the technology."
"Over the past 30 days, Governor Newsom signed 17 bills covering the deployment and regulation of GenAI technology..." according to a statement from the governor's office, "cracking down on deepfakes, requiring AI watermarking, protecting children and workers, and combating AI-generated misinformation... The Newsom Administration will also immediately engage academia to convene labor stakeholders and the private sector to explore approaches to use GenAI technology in the workplace."
In a separate statement the governor pointed out California " is home to 32 of the world's 50 leading Al companies," and warned that the bill "could give the public a false sense of security about controlling this fast-moving technology. Smaller, specialized models may emerge as equally or even more dangerous than the models targeted by SB 1047 — at the potential expense of curtailing the very innovation that fuels advancement in favor of the public good..."
"While well-intentioned, SB 1047 does not take into account whether an AI system is deployed in high-risk environments, involves critical decision-making or the use of sensitive data. Instead, the bill applies stringent standards to even the most basic functions — so long as a large system deploys it.
"I do not believe this is the best approach to protecting the public from real threats posed by the technology."
Interestingly, the Los Angeles Times reported that the vetoed bill had been supported by Mark Hamill, J.J. Abrams, and "more than 125 Hollywood actors, directors, producers, music artists and entertainment industry leaders" who signed a letter of support. (And that bill also cited the support of "over a hundred current and former employees of OpenAI, Google DeepMind, Anthropic, Meta, and xAI..."
stringent standards across the board (Score:2)
No, this stuff needs to meet stringent standards. Be it in a car or a shopping car. As long a we're going to have these systems interacting with people every day, we need them to meet some stringent standards.
Re:stringent standards across the board (Score:5, Insightful)
The whole AI safety thing is that OpenAI and the rest know they have something that can be run on a desktop with a GPU and downloaded from Huggingface. The only way to keep big businesses on top and push out small companies is to have government step in, and mandate a huge amount of bureaucracy and necessary committees only big players can afford to pay. Meanwhile, Apple is putting together the hardware through neural engine and the rest that make it a Desktop thing. One of these paths has a future, one does not. Good veto, good for CA businesses, good for users.
Re: (Score:2)
what is a "shopping car". There are already safety standards on car and aeroplane software, and this has nothing to do with the product safety, but its predicated on the concept of third party liability for companies that allow other people to use general purpose tools, similar to a theory that Adobe should be legally responsible for people using it to forge documents.
Re: (Score:2)
Newsom's on a roll (Score:2)
First the car speed-nanny thing, now this. Unfortunately tempering the excesses of the California legislature is more than a full time job.
Re: Newsom's on a roll (Score:2)
It is election season and Newsome desperately needs to look like a moderate while he is on the campaign trail as a surrogate for Harris.
Re: Newsom's on a roll (Score:5, Informative)
At least he's not pretending he has a family [imgur.com] by using someone else's family.
Re: (Score:2)
Just like Candice Owens discovered that Kamala Harris was pretending to have a black grandma in her memoir, only for those death records to find out that her black gramdmother died before she was even born, making it impossible for the woman in the photograph to be her grandmother?
Do you have any actual proof of this? Rumors on Twitter don't count.
Re: (Score:2)
More than that, he's planning to run for President in four years, and he know better than to be the Democratic candidate that can't carry his own state.
California is facing a critical budget crisis, with, already, some of the highest taxes in the US. And tech have tons of money; if he looks out for them, and that's what this is, they'll contribute millions.
And the legislature knows what he's going to veto before they even vote on it, because Nuisance is a party soldier, obeying his handlers (if he weren't h
Re: (Score:1)
Unfortunately tempering the excesses of the California legislature is more than a full time job.
Nimrod, the CA Legislature can override his veto. They have a super-majority.
Re: (Score:2)
I like how a biblical hunter's name became an insult because very few people who watched an old bugs bunny cartoon understood the context.
Re: (Score:1)
who watched an old bugs bunny cartoon understood the context.
Wrong! However, it is in fact Daffy Duck who refers to Fudd as "my little Nimrod" in the 1948 short "What Makes Daffy Duck".
Imagine that, another little Nimrod that spouts opinionated, biased lies on this site.
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. Watch "A Wild Hare"
Re: (Score:1)
I can find nothing about that in the 1940 short, "A Wild Hare".
Daffy was first though.
Fritz Freleng (director) (10 February 1951). Rabbit Every Monday (Animated short). Event occurs at 6:50. "Nah, I couldn't do that to the little Nimrod."
Re: (Score:2)
Because you say something first does not mean you are the one who creates the thing. Ask Leibniz. :)
Arnold (Score:2)
You mean âoepaid to vetoâ⦠(Score:2, Insightful)
Likely would have failed the first 1a challenge (Score:2)
so Vetoing it just saves the state money.
If the Hollywood elite support it... (Score:1)
then it must be the most amazingest idea!!
https://www.yahoo.com/news/mar... [yahoo.com]