Hacker News Reader

Comment by generalizations | Hacker News Reader

> "no State or political subdivision thereof may enforce any law or regulation regulating artificial intelligence models, artificial intelligence systems, or automated decision systems during the 10 year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act."

This seems like a really good thing. I would have been more inclined to mock any heavy-handed attempts at regulating AI, anyway.

View on HN

The states are supposed to be "laboratories of democracy". If people in some states want to regulate AI there, why shouldn't they be able to? And if it's too heavy-handed in practice, let the other states use their lack of such regulation as a carrot to lure companies in. Why do the feds need to be involved here at all?

[flagged]

I don't love heavy-handed approaches like this, but it does seem very in line with small government politics.

Essentially, this is saying that the executive can't create regulations that add regulations that limit what businesses can do (which would be relevant when the party in power of the executive changes)

it specifically targets the states - the executive seems free to create those regulations by my reading?

Whoops, yep you are completely right and I was totally wrong! Bad day for my reading comprehension!

The executive doesn't care what the law says. This law constrains the states. The opposite of what the GOP believes in almost every other things where the states are sufficiently -ist/-phobic.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com