The Biden administration's executive order on artificial intelligence, released Monday, has injected a degree of certainty into a chaotic year of debate about what legal guardrails are needed for powerful AI systems, Axios reports.
Biden's approach is more carrot than stick—the U.S. won't have licensing requirements or rules requiring companies to disclose training data sources, model size and other important details—but it could be enough to move the U.S. ahead of overseas rivals in the race to regulate AI.
The full executive order, which totals more than 100 pages, tries to chart a middle path—allowing AI development to continue largely undisturbed while putting some modest rules in place, the New York Times reports.
Meanwhile, governments from six continents on Wednesday agreed to a broad road map to limit the risks and harness the benefits of AI, the Washington Post reports. In the Bletchley Declaration, global adversaries China and the U.S. agreed on a series of guiding principles with the European Union, Britain and 24 other nations to prevent risk including the potential for “catastrophic harm either deliberate or unintentional.”
On Sept. 12, the Justice Department’s lawsuit against Google’s search engine monopoly went to trial. What’s at stake? Oh, Vox says, nothing much—just the future of the internet. Or maybe the future of antitrust law in the US. Maybe both. Google says it dominates search because it has the best engine. The Justice Department says it’s because Google pays a host of companies billions of dollars a year to make its search the default on the vast majority of devices and browsers.
The long-term slump in the global semiconductor industry may be ending, providing relief for the U.S. government, which is spending billions on expanding chip production, the Wall Street Journal reports. The Buffalo-Rochester-Syracuse region is one of 31 nationwide have recently earned the federal Tech Hub designation created in the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022.
On Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a pair of cases involving liability for public officials who block critics on their personal social-media accounts. In a preview of the oral arguments, SCOTUSblog wrote that the two cases, O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier and Lindke v. Freed, are the first in a series of disputes before the high court this term arising out of the relationship between government and social media.
“A pyramid of deceit was built by the defendant. That ultimately collapsed.”
—Assistant U.S. Attorney Nicolas Roos, in final arguments at the criminal-fraud trial of FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried