California Governor Gavin Newsom vetoes contentious artificial intelligence safety bill

California Governor Gavin Newsom has vetoed a significant AI safety bill, citing concerns that it inadequately addressed the regulation of smaller AI systems used in high-risk environments. He is forming a new committee to develop tailored legislation for AI, emphasizing the need for effective public safety measures while fostering innovation in the rapidly evolving technology landscape.

California Governor Gavin Newsom has vetoed a significant artificial intelligence (AI) safety bill, highlighting the complexities of regulating rapidly evolving technology. In his decision, Newsom aims to strike a balance between ensuring public safety and fostering innovation. He has announced the formation of a new committee tasked with developing tailored legislation for AI, indicating his commitment to addressing the challenges posed by AI technologies.

The vetoed bill was intended to apply to the largest and most costly AI models, but Newsom expressed concerns that it did not adequately cover other AI systems that could be deployed in high-risk environments. He pointed out that smaller AI models, such as those used in auto-correct features and customer service chatbots, would not fall under the bill’s regulations. This distinction raises questions about the effectiveness of the proposed legislation in safeguarding public interests.

In his veto letter, Newsom emphasized the urgency of taking action to protect the public from potential AI-related risks, stating that waiting for a major catastrophe is not an option. He is collaborating with prominent AI researchers, including Stanford University professor Lee, to establish practical guidelines for AI regulation. This proactive approach suggests that Newsom is serious about creating a framework that addresses the safety concerns associated with AI technologies.

Despite his efforts, there are criticisms regarding the standards set forth in the vetoed bill. Opponents argued that the regulations were too vague and could hinder innovation, potentially leading to confusion among developers. They also suggested that AI regulation should be handled at the federal level, which adds another layer of complexity to the regulatory landscape.

California State Senator Scott Wiener described the veto as a setback, reflecting the ongoing struggle to find a balance between regulation and innovation in the tech industry. As discussions continue, it remains to be seen how the new committee will navigate the challenges of AI regulation and whether it will lead to effective measures that protect the public while allowing for technological advancement.