California lawmakers pass AI safety bill SB 53 — but Newsom could still veto

California State Senate Gave final approval On Saturday morning, a large AI protection bill determines the new transparent requirements in large companies.

As As described by the author, State Senator Scott Winner, SB 53 “They need big AI labs to be transparent about their protection protocols, creating whistle blower protection [employees] In AI labs and calculations create a universal cloud to extend the access (Calcoput). “

The bill now goes to sign or veto the California Governor Gavin News. He did not comment publicly on SB 53, but last year he More broad security bill veto Composed by the Winner, while Signature of narrow law Takes things like Dipfeck.

At that time, News acknowledged the importance of protecting people from the “real threat of this technology”, but criticized Winner’s previous bill for applying “strict criteria” to large models, regardless of whether they were deployed in a high-risky environment, ” [involved] Critical decision -making or use sensitive data. “

Winner said the new bill was AI experts affected by recommendations from the policy panel That News calls her veto later.

Politico has also reported SB 53 was recently revised so that the “Frontier” AI models of “Frontier” AI models should only be published in the annual revenue that the “Frontier” AI models should only disclose high -level security details, while more than the companies created by more detailed reports.

The bill has opposed several Silicon Valley companies, VC farms and parties. In A recent letter to NewsmOpina did not specifically mention SB 53, but argued that companies would be considered as loyal to the state -wide security rules until they met the federal or European standards to avoid “duplication and inconsistencies”.

And the chief and chief legal officer of the AI ​​policy of Andresen Horovits Has recently been claimed That is like “California and New York proposals – AI bills in many states today – such as states cross a line in violation of the constitutional boundary of how inter -state trade can control.”

A16z’s co-founder earlier points to technical control that as one of the reasons to lead them Back to Donald Trump’s Bid in the second termThe The Trump administration and its allies later called for 10 years of ban on state AI controlThe

Meanwhile there is an ethnographic Come out in favor of SB 53The

“We have long been saying that we will like a federal value,” the ethnic co-founder Jack Clark says In a postThe “But in the absence of this, it creates a solid sapphire for the AI ​​administration that cannot be ignored.”