Optimus’s-rite-smokestack

There was an attempt to block state AI laws before, but massive republican backlash stopped it, but with Marsha Blackburn, there could be chance, though it’s not fully guaranteed

“The White House is negotiating a federal preemption of some state AI laws in exchange for its support of key tech policy priorities from the Hill, Axios has learned.”

“Why it matters: States are increasingly passing stronger AI laws, and the Trump administration is feeling the heat to get something done.”

“The talks are aiming to pair one of the tech industry's top priorities — overriding state AI laws — with legislation aimed at protecting kids online and combating deepfakes.”

Marsha Blackburn is leading the “negotiations, per a spokesperson, which include the Kids Online Safety Act and other tech-related measures.”

a Blackburn spokesperson has said

"Senator Blackburn is spearheading the negotiation with the White House to finalize legislative text of an AI preemption package that includes protections for kids, creators, and communities through the Senate version of KOSA, the NO FAKES Act, and age verification requirements,"

The spokesperson said that the package is not "blanket preemption of all laws regulating AI or child safety."

a White House official has said

"The White House continues to proactively engage across government and industry,"

“The big picture: The maneuvering between Congress and the White House shows that a bipartisan proposal from Reps. Jay Obernolte (R-Calif.) and Lori Trahan (D-Mass.) isn't the likely vehicle for AI policy in this Congress.”

“That bill would preempt state AI laws for three years, formally establish the Center for AI Standards and Innovation and require certain developers to address risks prior to releasing models.”

“Two sources told Axios the White House is also holding a meeting this week with AI companies to dig into what benchmarking should look like for the recent AI and cyber executive order.”

“The revival of the preemption fight comes on the heels of Trump signing an AI and cyber executive order last week that includes voluntary pre-deployment testing of frontier models.

The bottom line: This flurry of AI action will ultimately be hard to pull off as August recess in an election year nears.”

call your representatives and tell them not to support this at all

Painting of 2025!

the woke left: young and fashionable. visible tattoos. often enjoys matcha, lavender flavoring, oat milk, and cold foam. pretty decent customers.

sweet old man: drinks very sweet iced lattes, pays in cash, puts all of his change in the tip jar. sometimes orders hot coffee and i get scared that his shaky old man hands will spill it and he'll get burned but that has not yet happened and god willing never shall.

evil old man: only wants drip coffee and declares it ridiculous that any other form of coffee exists. some variants only want americanos and these variants are even scarier. watch out.

sweet old woman: might need her daughter's help to order but is very bubbly and open to trying new things. compliments baristas freely and frequently.

evil old woman: does not want coffee and only wants sweet tea or soda. will not tip even if she spends three hours in the shop repeatedly asking baristas to fetch things for her.

errand husband: either stiltedly recites an order to you or shows you the order in their texts/notes app. needs to step out of line and make a phone call if you ask any follow-up questions.

grindset girlie: always wearing scrubs, an apron, and/or a name tag. orders the exact same thing every day and knows the exact change she'll need to pay for it. her regular order is both extremely caffeinated and extremely sweet.

#mamabear: is actively wrangling two to four children while ordering. order changes repeatedly because the children cannot decide if they want a muffin or a cookie or apple juice or chocolate milk etc. for some reason these women are always wearing an article of clothing or carrying some personalized item that says "mama" on it.

schoolchildren: band of two to eight adolescents hanging out after school. extremely indecisive but generally quite polite and tip well.

amnesiac in love: grown adult who needs their partner to tell them what they like. gets asked a question about their own preferences and turns to their partner to answer for them. generally acts like a shy child looking to their guardian for behavioral cues if you try to interact with them and only wants to talk to mommy i mean their wife.

1. The court holds Google responsible for statements made by its AI, considering them Google's statements (search engines have limited liability for results in their engine as they're the words of other sites/companies/people), meaning when their AI lies/hallucinates they're liable for the defamation/harm resulting from those statements.

2. Google's defense that customers are generally aware of the lack of reliability and are responsible for fact checking was dismissed. As the court pointed out, that would "significantly diminish" AI Search's stated purpose and it can't be distinguished from Google's business practices/statements as a search tool.

3. Studies have found about 91% of Google's everyday AI responses are accurate, leaving millions of searches per HOUR with potential liability for falsehoods. 56% of correct responses weren't supported by the sources the AI listed. Both of which mean Google is now liable for a LOT more AI "errors."

4. Google was held liable for 80% of court costs in this case and this precedent is expected to reverberate around the world. This is a massive shift from the 3rd-party search provider role Google has previously played and it comes right as they've tied ALL searches to their AI search.