California lawmakers pass coroversial bill Artificial ielligence safety have voted in favor of which Silicon Valley companies have mixed opinions.
According to the insider report, this bill that SB 1047 It is called, it was proposed seven mohs ago by Senator “Scott Weiner” and was approved in the state assembly on Wednesday. Now everyone is waiting for the decision of Gwynne Newsom, the governor of California, about this bill, who has uil September 30 (October 9) to announce his final opinion on whether to approve or veto it.
The bill aims to develop security measures at companies that spend at least $100 million to train artificial ielligence models so that their technology is not used to harm society or carry out cyber attacks.
The bill also requires companies operating in California to report any security incides to the state, protect whistleblowers, and allow third parties to test their models. Also, if necessary, the legislators can force companies to close completely.
The reaction of Silicon Valley influeial people to the artificial ielligence safety bill
This bill has faced differe reactions from Silicon Valley companies and influeial people.
Jason Cowen, OpenAI’s chief strategy officer, is among those who warned in a letter that the bill could slow the pace of AI progress and cause companies to leave the state. Meta also claimed that the bill would create legal responsibilities for developers, which would jeopardize the developme of open source models.
On the other hand, “Elon Musk” has supported this bill.
Musk, who founded his artificial ielligence company xAI last year and has a long-standing rivalry with Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI, said on social networks that “accepting this bill is a difficult decision, though, and it will upset some people.” , but he thinks California should pass SB 1047 AI safety bill.
Musk writes in X:
“For more than 20 years, I have been an advocate for AI regulation, just as we regulate any product or technology that poses a poteial risk to the public.”
Dario Amodi, CEO of Eropic, also said in a letter last week that the bill’s benefits likely outweigh its costs. However, he explained in the coinuation of his letter that “some aspects of this bill are still worrisome or unclear”.
