Core

Artificial Intelligence

Secure

Frontier

California lawmakers have amended a controversial bill that would hold artificial intelligence firms accountable for harms caused by their products in response to industry criticism. However, it’s unclear if the state’s concessions will be enough to convince naysayers in the tech industry.&nbsp;
The bill, called the Safe and Secure Innovation for Frontier Artificial Intelligence Models Act (SB-1074), essentially seeks to protect whistleblowers and empower the state of California to intervene if it has reason to believe an AI-related catastrophe is going to occur. 
As Cointelegraph recently reported, the tech industry is in a bit of <a href="https://cointelegraph.com/news/california-ai-bill-aimed-preventing-disasters-draws-ire-silicon-valley">an uproar over the bill’s stipulations</a>, with many tech luminaries saying it would stifle innovation and growth.&nbsp;
<h2 id="stifling-innovation">Stifling innovation</h2>
In its original format, the bill would have allowed the state to sue firms for negligence over lax safety practices, even if the violations didn’t result in a catastrophic event. It would have also created a government oversight board responsible for implementing and enforcing said safety practices. 
After negative feedback from the tech industry, including a comprehensive list of suggestions from AI firm Anthropic, California Senator Scott Weiner <a href="https://techcrunch.com/2024/08/15/california-weakens-bill-to-prevent-ai-disasters-before-final-vote-taking-advice-from-anthropic/" target="_blank" rel="noopener nofollow">claimed</a> his office was under the belief it had found a happy medium: 
<blockquote data-ct-non-breakable="true">
 “We accepted a number of very reasonable amendments proposed, and I believe we’ve addressed the core concerns expressed by Anthropic and many others in the industry,”
</blockquote>
<h2 id="core-concerns">Core concerns</h2>
However, based on the bill’s new language, it appears lawmakers still haven’t addressed the tech world’s core concern. Whether the state can sue prior to a catastrophe or merely issue injunctions is tangential to the essential problem of liability.
SB-1074 would still allow the state to hold any AI developer responsible for harm caused by their products. In many cases, it’s near impossible to predict all the ways that “harm” could manifest from an AI model.&nbsp;
The bill’s next step is a final assembly vote, which, according to the schedule, must be held prior to Aug. 31. At that point, unless the governor decides to veto it, technology firms operating in the state of California will face a regulatory environment unlike any other in the country. 
Related: <a href="https://cointelegraph.com/news/ai-researchers-solve-bot-problem-requiring-id-use-internet">AI researchers want to solve the bot problem by requiring ID to use the internet</a>

California removes teeth from AI law without addressing tech’s core concerns

Table of Contents

Cointelegraph

Other articles published on Aug 16, 2024

Judge Approves $12.7B Repayment Plan for FTX Creditors

Big XRP News: SEC Has 10% Chance of Winning Appeal?

BTC Approaches $60,000 While Altcoins Show Mixed Signals

Rollblock’s 100x crypto forecast for 2024 ranks it with Binance coin and Near Protocol

Malaysia adopts Worldcoin for personal verification and digital ID

Can $11 Million Inflow Trigger A Breakout In Stacks (STX) Price?

Join our free newsletter for daily crypto updates!