California’s new AI safety law shows regulation and innovation don’t have to clash 

SB 53, AI Protection and Transparency Bill that California Governor Gavin News signed the Act this weekEvidence that AI should not be prevented in state control.

So in today’s episode of Equity, the Youth Advocacy Group Encode AI Vice President Adam Billen said.

Bileen told TechCrunch, “The reality is that the policy makers themselves know that we have to do something and they work on a million other issues that there is a way to pass the law that protects the true innovation – which I care – while ensuring that these products are safe,” Bilen tells TechCrunch.

At its core, SB 53 is the first-domestic bill For this, large AI labs need to be transparent about their protection and protection protocols-especially how they prevent their models from catastrophic risk, such as cybattacks in critical infrastructure, used to create or create bio-weapons. The law also commands that companies are sticking to those protocols, which will be applied by the emergency service office.

“The companies have already asked them to do the things they have asked to do in this bill,” Bileen told TechCrunch. ” “They test the protection in their models they publish the model cards. They have begun to start shaking in some cases in some organizations? Yes and that’s why these national bills are important.”

Bilen also mentions that some AI companies have a policy around the surrender of security under competitive pressure. For example, Openai has publicly stated that it is Its protection requirements may “adjust” If a rival AI Lab reveals a high-risky system without similar protection. Billen argued that policies prevent the reasons of competitive or financial stress, can apply the existing security promises of companies.

Although the public opposition to SB 53 was mute Compared with SB 1047 of its predecessorWhich News vetoed last yearThe speech between Silicon Valley and most AI labs was that almost any AI control progress would be antemma and eventually the United States to defeat China.

This is why strong people like Meta, Andresen Horovits and OpenAI President Greg Broken are collectively pumping millions of II-pro-politicians in the super PAC in the state elections. And that’s why the same forces have pressed for one at the beginning of this year AI Mortorium It banned states in controlling AI for 10 years.

The Encode AI opened an alliance of more than 200 companies to work Hit the proposalHowever, Bileen says the fight is not over. Senator Ted Cruise, who championed the suspension, is trying a new strategy to achieve the same goal of the federal premises of state laws. In September, the cruise introduces Sandbox lawWhich will allow AI companies to temporarily applied for the waiver to bypass some federal rules temporarily up to 10 years. Bilen also expects an upcoming bill to establish a Federal AI standard that will be created as a mid-place solution, but in reality the state laws will override.

He cautioned that the Federal AI Act narrowly “can erase federalism for the most important technology of our time.”

Bilen said, “If you tell me SB 53 that bill that will replace all the state bills with AI and all potential risks, I will tell you that this is probably not a very good idea and this bill is designed for a specific subset,” said Bilen.

Although he agrees that AI race issues with China need to be implemented in Matters, and policymakers, which will support American progress, he says that the killing of state bills – which basically focus on dipfakes, transparency, algorithmical discrimination, protection of children and the official use of AI – is not a way to do this.

“What are the bills like SB 53 that will stop us from beating China? No,” he said. “I think it’s really Buddhistly dishonest to say that it is the thing that will stop our competition.”

He further added: “If the thing you take care of if the thing you care is to beat China in the competition – and I care about it – the things you press for are staff as the export control of the Congress,” said Bilen. “You will make sure that American companies have chips. But the industry is not pressing it.”

Like legal proposal Chip protection law Aim to prevent evolution of advanced AI chips in China through export control and tracking devices and existing Chips and the law of science Trying to increase domestic chip production. However, some of the major technology companies, including OpenAI and Nvidia, have been unwilling or revealed Opposition About some aspects of this effort, referring to concern EffectivenessThe weakness of competition and protection.

Nvidia has reasons – it has a strong financial enthusiasm for China to continue to sell chips, which contains Ically tihassically Represents a significant part of its global income. Billen assumed that the open suppliers like Open Nvidia could hold the chip export advocacy to stay in good grades.

There is also an inconsistent message from the Trump administration. Three months after a stretch Exports to China in advanced AI chips April 2025, the administration reverse the course, lets Nvidia and AMD sell China some chips 15% of the revenue exchangeThe

Bilen said, “You see that people in the mountains are moving towards bills like the Chip Protection Act that controls export to China,” said Bileen. “In the meantime, this proposal of the narrative will continue to kill the state bills that are actually light strong.”

Billen added that SB 53 is an example of the activities of democracy – art and policy makers get a version of a bill to work together that everyone may agree. This is “extremely ugly and messy” but “this process of democracy and federalism is the full basis of our country and our economic system and I hope we will continue it successfully.”

“I think SB 53 is one of the best proof points that can still work,” he said.

This article was first published on October 1.