Banning AI Regulation Would Be a Disaster; The Atlantic, December 11, 2025

Chuck Hagel, The Atlantic; Banning AI Regulation Would Be a Disaster

"On Monday, Donald Trump announced on Truth Social that he would soon sign an executive order prohibiting states from regulating AI...

The greatest challenges facing the United States do not come from overregulation but from deploying ever more powerful AI systems without minimum requirements for safety and transparency...

Contrary to the narrative promoted by a small number of dominant firms, regulation does not have to slow innovation. Clear rules would foster growth by hardening systems against attack, reducing misuse, and ensuring that the models integrated into defense systems and public-facing platforms are robust and secure before deployment at scale.

Critics of oversight are correct that a patchwork of poorly designed laws can impede that mission. But they miss two essential points. First, competitive AI policy cannot be cordoned off from the broader systems that shape U.S. stability and resilience...

Second, states remain the country’s most effective laboratories for developing and refining policy on complex, fast-moving technologies, especially in the persistent vacuum of federal action...

The solution to AI’s risks is not to dismantle oversight but to design the right oversight. American leadership in artificial intelligence will not be secured by weakening the few guardrails that exist. It will be secured the same way we have protected every crucial technology touching the safety, stability, and credibility of the nation: with serious rules built to withstand real adversaries operating in the real world. The United States should not be lobbied out of protecting its own future."

‘The biggest decision yet’; The Guardian, December 2, 2025

Robert Booth , The Guardian; ‘The biggest decision yet’

"Humanity will have to decide by 2030 whether to take the “ultimate risk” of letting artificial intelligence systems train themselves to become more powerful, one of the world’s leading AI scientists has said.

Jared Kaplan, the chief scientist and co-owner of the $180bn (£135bn) US startup Anthropic, said a choice was looming about how much autonomy the systems should be given to evolve.

The move could trigger a beneficial “intelligence explosion” – or be the moment humans end up losing control...

He is not alone at Anthropic in voicing concerns. One of his co-founders, Jack Clark, said in October he was both an optimist and “deeply afraid” about the trajectory of AI, which he called “a real and mysterious creature, not a simple and predictable machine”.

Kaplan said he was very optimistic about the alignment of AI systems with the interests of humanity up to the level of human intelligence, but was concerned about the consequences if and when they exceed that threshold."

Virginia teachers learn AI tools and ethics at largest statewide workshop; WTVR, July 23, 2025

 

WTVR CBS 6 Web Staff; Virginia teachers learn AI tools and ethics at largest statewide workshop


[Kip Currier: Nothing in this brief article substantively (or even cursorily) talks about the ethics issues of K-12 teachers using AI tools. The piece extolls what can be gained by teachers using AI tools. But what's lost by using these products? What skills do we not gain or hone by relying on AI to think and create for us?

Was an ethics code or AI code of conduct discussed at all at this two-day gathering of teachers?

And what about the ongoing problem of AI hallucinations-- i.e. inaccurate and nonexistent information generated by AI? Nowhere in this reporting is the need for proofreading and verification of AI-generated outputs even mentioned.

In the pell-mell rush to adopt AI tools, fueled by AI tech companies, it's vital to remember the need for embracing AI ethics guidelines and guardrails.]

[Excerpt]

"Hundreds of Virginia teachers are getting hands-on experience with artificial intelligence tools, ethics and curriculum integration at the largest statewide professional development workshop focused on AI.

The two-day workshop, hosted by AI Ready RVA, continues Thursday at the VCU School of Business...

"There are tools that allow teachers to create lesson plans or quizzes or rubrics immediately based on a source that they can find online so they don't have to spend hours on Sunday prepping for the week ahead. And so we have a list of various platforms that we're going to be teaching them and practice sessions so that they can master these tools so that way they start the school year really strong," Demetriou said."

Trump’s AI agenda hands Silicon Valley the win—while ethics, safety, and ‘woke AI’ get left behind; Fortune, July 24, 2025

 SHARON GOLDMAN, Fortune; Trump’s AI agenda hands Silicon Valley the win—while ethics, safety, and ‘woke AI’ get left behind

"For the “accelerationists”—those who believe the rapid development and deployment of artificial intelligence should be pursued as quickly as possible—innovation, scale, and speed are everything. Over-caution and regulation? Ill-conceived barriers that will actually cause more harm than good. They argue that faster progress will unlock massive economic growth, scientific breakthroughs, and national advantage. And if superintelligence is inevitable, they say, the U.S. had better get there first—before rivals like China’s authoritarian regime.

AI ethics and safety has been sidelined

This worldview, articulated by Marc Andreessen in his 2023 blog post, has now almost entirely displaced the diverse coalition of people who worked on AI ethics and safety during the Biden Administration—from mainstream policy experts focused on algorithmic fairness and accountability, to the safety researchers in Silicon Valley who warn of existential risks. While they often disagreed on priorities and tone, both camps shared the belief that AI needed thoughtful guardrails. Today, they find themselves largely out of step with an agenda that prizes speed, deregulation, and dominance.

Whether these groups can claw their way back to the table is still an open question. The mainstream ethics folks—with roots in civil rights, privacy, and democratic governance—may still have influence at the margins, or through international efforts. The existential risk researchers, once tightly linked to labs like OpenAI and Anthropic, still hold sway in academic and philanthropic circles. But in today’s environment—where speed, scale, and geopolitical muscle set the tone—both camps face an uphill climb. If they’re going to make a comeback, I get the feeling it won’t be through philosophical arguments. More likely, it would be because something goes wrong—and the public pushes back."

Overcoming AI’s Nagging Trust And Ethics Issues; Forbes, December 28, 2024

Joe McKendrick, Forbes ; Overcoming AI’s Nagging Trust And Ethics Issues

"Trust and ethics in AI is what is making business leaders nervous. For example, at least 72% of executives responding to a recent surveyfrom the IBM Institute for Business Value say they “are willing to forgo generative AI benefits due to ethical concerns.” In addition, more than half (56%) indicate they are delaying major investments in generative AI until there is clarity on AI standards and regulations...

"Today, guardrails are a growing area of practice for the AI community given the stochastic nature of these models,” said Ross. “Guardrails can be employed for virtually any area of decisioning, from examining bias to preventing the leakage of sensitive data."...

The situation is not likely to change soon, Jeremy Rambarran, professor at Touro University Graduate School, pointed out. “Although the output that's being generated may be unique, depending on how the output is being presented, there's always a chance that part of the results may not be entirely accurate. This will eventually change down the road as algorithms are enhanced and could eventually be updated in an automated manner.”...

How can AI be best directed to be ethical and trustworthy? Compliance requirements, of course, will be a major driver of AI trust in the future, said Rambarran. “We need to ensure that AI-driven processes comply with ethical guidelines, legal regulations, and industry standards. Humans should be aware of the ethical implications of AI decisions and be ready to intervene when ethical concerns arise.”

Biden Administration Outlines Government ‘Guardrails’ for A.I. Tools; The New York Times, October 24, 2024

David E. Sanger, The New York Times ; Biden Administration Outlines Government ‘Guardrails’ for A.I. Tools

"President Biden on Thursday signed the first national security memorandum detailing how the Pentagon, the intelligence agencies and other national security institutions should use and protect artificial intelligence technology, putting “guardrails” on how such tools are employed in decisions varying from nuclear weapons to granting asylum.

The new document is the latest in a series Mr. Biden has issued grappling with the challenges of using A.I. tools to speed up government operations — whether detecting cyberattacks or predicting extreme weather — while limiting the most dystopian possibilities, including the development of autonomous weapons.

But most of the deadlines the order sets for agencies to conduct studies on applying or regulating the tools will go into full effect after Mr. Biden leaves office, leaving open the question of whether the next administration will abide by them...

The new guardrails would also prohibit letting artificial intelligence tools make a decision on granting asylum. And they would forbid tracking someone based on ethnicity or religion, or classifying someone as a “known terrorist” without a human weighing in.

Perhaps the most intriguing part of the order is that it treats private-sector advances in artificial intelligence as national assets that need to be protected from spying or theft by foreign adversaries, much as early nuclear weapons were. The order calls for intelligence agencies to begin protecting work on large language models or the chips used to power their development as national treasures, and to provide private-sector developers with up-to-the-minute intelligence to safeguard their inventions."

What's Next in AI: How do we regulate AI, and protect against worst outcomes?; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, October 13, 2024

EVAN ROBINSON-JOHNSON , Pittsburgh Post-Gazette; What's Next in AI: How do we regulate AI, and protect against worst outcomes?

"Gov. Josh Shapiro will give more of an update on that project and others at a Monday event in Pittsburgh.

While most folks will likely ask him how Pennsylvania can build and use the tools of the future, a growing cadre in Pittsburgh is asking a broader policy question about how to protect against AI’s worst tendencies...

There are no federal laws that regulate the development and use of AI. Even at the state level, policies are sparse. California Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed a major AI safety bill last month that would have forced greater commitments from the nation’s top AI developers, most of which are based in the Golden State...

Google CEO Sundar Pichai made a similar argument during a visit to Pittsburgh last month. He encouraged students from local high schools to build AI systems that will make the world a better place, then told a packed audience at Carnegie Mellon University that AI is “too important a technology not to regulate.”

Mr. Pichai said he’s hoping for an “innovation-oriented approach” that mostly leverages existing regulations rather than reinventing the wheel."

Gavin Newsom vetoes sweeping AI safety bill, siding with Silicon Valley; Politico, September 29, 2024

 LARA KORTE and JEREMY B. WHITE, Politico; Gavin Newsom vetoes sweeping AI safety bill, siding with Silicon Valley

"Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed a sweeping California bill meant to impose safety vetting requirements for powerful AI models, siding with much of Silicon Valley and leading congressional Democrats in the most high-profile fight in the Legislature this year."