California’s SB 1047, the bill aimed at preventing AI disasters, has been watered down following pushback from AI companies like Anthropic. While I’m still against this misguided legislation, the recent amendments have slightly weakened its potential for harm.
Key changes include:
1. Limiting the attorney general’s ability to sue AI companies before a catastrophic event occurs
2. Removing criminal liability for AI labs that fail to submit safety test results
3. Scrapping the creation of a new government agency, instead placing a Board of Frontier Models within an existing agency
These amendments attempt to balance AI safety concerns with innovation, but they’ve drawn criticism for gutting the bill’s teeth. Frankly, I’m not surprised. Overreaching regulation often gets neutered when faced with industry opposition and practical realities.
Interestingly, Nancy Pelosi came out against the bill – probably the only thing she’s ever done that I agree with. Even a broken clock is right twice a day, I suppose.
While the changes make SB 1047 slightly less damaging, it’s still fundamentally flawed. Government attempts to regulate cutting-edge technology rarely end well. They lack the agility and expertise to keep pace with rapid advancements, often stifling innovation in the process.
Instead of ham-fisted regulation, we should focus on fostering responsible AI development through industry collaboration and ethical frameworks. Companies have far more incentive to ensure their AI systems are safe and beneficial than bureaucrats do.
Ultimately, SB 1047 – even in its weakened form – sets a dangerous precedent for government overreach into AI development. We should be wary of any attempts to centralize control over such a transformative technology.
If you want to dive deeper into the potential impact of SB 1047 on large language models, check out my previous post on the topic: [SB 1047: Potential Impact on Large Language Models](https://adam.holter.com/sb-1047-potential-impact-on-large-language-models/)
What are your thoughts on the amendments to SB 1047? Do you think they go far enough, or is the bill still too restrictive? Let me know in the comments below.
