The urgency to regulate artificial intelligence (AI) has reached a critical juncture. As AI technology advances at a rapid pace, California’s SB 1047 bill aims to provide a stringent regulatory framework.
Currently on the desk of Governor Gavin Newsom, SB 1047 has stirred significant debate, reflecting its potential to reshape the AI landscape.
The Ambitious Beginnings of SB 1047
SB 1047, introduced by state Senator Scott Wiener, was originally designed to tightly regulate advanced AI models. The bill required safety testing, certifications, and the implementation of a ‘kill switch’ to shut down rogue models.
Developers would face lawsuits and potential perjury charges, making it one of the strictest regulatory frameworks in the United States.
Industry Reactions
The tech industry, including major AI players like OpenAI and Anthropic, largely opposed the bill. Critics argue that stringent regulations could stifle innovation and put the U.S. at a competitive disadvantage globally.
Andrew Ng, cofounder of Coursera, publicly criticised the bill, highlighting the distinction between AI technology and its applications. ‘The risk of AI is not a function. It doesn’t depend on the technology — it depends on the application,’ Ng stated at a Y Combinator event.
The Softened Version of SB 1047
In response to industry backlash, the bill was amended significantly. The revised version removed the proposed regulatory agency and eliminated the ability for the attorney general to sue developers.
Additionally, developers are no longer required to submit safety certifications under the threat of perjury. Small startups and open-source developers received protection through a clause exempting entities spending less than $10 million on fine-tuning a model.
Support for the Amended Bill
Despite the amendments, some experts support the bill’s intent. Gary Marcus, an emeritus professor at NYU, argued that even a weakened SB 1047 could encourage AI companies to prioritise safety.
Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei also voiced support, suggesting the benefits of the bill outweigh its costs. A statement from employees of major AI companies echoed this sentiment, advocating for reasonable safeguards against severe AI-related risks.
Detractors Remain Unconvinced
Many detractors, however, maintain their opposition. Venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz criticised the amendments as superficial, while OpenAI’s chief strategy officer, Jason Kwon, warned that the bill could drive talent out of California.
‘Given those risks, we must protect America’s AI edge with a set of federal policies — rather than state ones,’ Kwon wrote in a letter to Newsom.
The Political Tightrope for Governor Newsom
Governor Gavin Newsom faces a challenging decision with SB 1047. The bill has implications for his political relationships, particularly with influential tech executives who are major campaign donors.
The rift between Silicon Valley and Democrats has widened, and Newsom’s decision could further complicate these dynamics. With presidential ambitions in mind, Newsom must carefully weigh the potential impacts of signing the bill into law.
The Future of AI Regulation
As the debate over SB 1047 unfolds, it underscores the broader challenge of regulating rapidly evolving technologies. The bill, whether passed or vetoed, will likely influence future legislative efforts in the U.S.
The world is closely watching California, a state with a significant impact on the tech industry, to see how it navigates this complex regulatory landscape.
The fate of SB 1047 now rests with Governor Newsom. His decision will have far-reaching consequences for the AI industry.
Regardless of the outcome, the bill has already ignited a crucial conversation about the future of AI regulation in the U.S.
