
The AI industry is split over new legislation in California that would implement a sort of emergency stop in AI systems.
Industry figures are divided on a contentious Californian artificial intelligence bill that passed on Aug. 28.
The new legislation will compel AI firms to implement new safety protocols, including an “emergency stop” button for AI models.
The Safe and Secure Innovation for Frontier Artificial Intelligence Models Act (SB 1047) passed the California Senate 29–9 on Aug. 28.
Crypto VC giant a16z claims the AI legislation will “burden startups because of its arbitrary and shifting thresholds.”
A California bill requiring AI developers to put up safety protocols to stop “critical harms” against humanity has caused a stir among the Silicon Valley’s tech community.
California’s “Safe and Secure Innovation for Frontier Artificial Intelligence Models Act," also known as SB 1047, would require AI developers to implement safety protocols to prevent events such as mass casualties or major cyberattacks.
It was proposed by California Democratic legislators in February.
A Harris administration could be younger and more pragmatic and bring “a fresh perspective toward crypto,” some believe.
The campaign of United States presidential candidate and sitting Vice President Kamala Harris has given several signals that her administration would benefit the crypto industry.
As Harris continues to climb in the polls, industry observers are beginning to ask more questions.
Would a Harris presidency include younger advisers and political appointees who are more open to cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology — unlike the old guard of Biden, Yellen and Gensler?
Governor Roy Cooper was slammed for not putting “partisan politics aside” to support a law that would benefit all North Carolina residents.
North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper has vetoed a bill banning the state from implementing a Federal Reserve-issued central bank digital currency despite receiving near-unanimous support in the House and Senate.
Cooper, who has faced criticism for making a politically motivated decision, explained in a June 5 statement that House Bill 690 was too “premature, vague, and reactionary” to sign into law.
Cooper’s veto followed a lopsided 109-4 vote in the House and a 39-5 vote in the Senate in late June.