Over on Engines of change
stacked (if that is indeed the correct term) about California’s new Ai regulation (S.B. 53). Necessary because, as Gavin Newsome mentions “California is the birthplace of modern technology and innovation.” 1 Quite the bold assertion, but is consistent with California’s approach. With the largest congressional delegation in the country, CA could easily drive regulations at the federal level, with 52 elected federal officials as of 2020.
States like OR, WA, and CO, who often follow California’s lead on regulatory matters, it would have been quite easy for CA to create a coalition at the Federal level to introduce similar legislation that protects citizens, including Californians and provide a consistent policy framework that reduces business compliance difficulties, therefore promoting national compliance.
In fact, two different bi-partisan bills are currently pending at the federal level:
S. 3312 “Artificial Intelligence Research, Innovation, and Accountability Act of 2024 “ already existed, filed Nov 15, 2023, and does not have any co-sponsors from CA
H.R. 7532 “Federal A.I. Governance and Transparency Act of 2024”, affects the Federal Government, not commercial, uses of Ai and was introduced in Mar of 2024 (co-sponsored by Rep. Ro Khanna).
Federal frameworks, implemented at the state level, like was done with the Interstate Highway System, rather than patchworks of individual state highways, helped ensure interoperability, commerce, and safety while providing implementation and enforcement at the state level. This type of approach, for Ai, would seem a far better approach towards realizing much needed regulation in the Ai space. The wheels of the legislative process do spin slow, but as the adage suggests “good things take time”. Which leaves me to wonder - what was the real intention of S.B. 53 in the State of California?
https://natlawreview.com/article/ai-frontier-what-californias-sb-53-means-large-ai-model-developers