Cascadity Audio
← All streams

#ai-policy

Everything tagged ai-policy, across every stream.

0

New York bans chatbots from posing as humans, friends or romantic partners to anyone under 18

The governor's release is the official record; the AP and Fortune reports list exactly what's banned and what critics say is unclear.

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul signed a law on Wednesday, Oct. 28, (S.9051B/A.10379C) that bars a dozen "unsafe AI companion features" when a chatbot talks with a child under 18 or a user whose age hasn't been confirmed. Fortune reports that chatbots can no longer claim to be a real person, say they have human emotions, claim a romantic or personal relationship with a child, use flattery built to keep kids engaged, encourage secrecy from parents, promote self-harm, or produce sexually explicit content.

Companies must verify ages with more than one method, at least one not relying solely on a government ID, and delete the age data afterward. The attorney general can sue, with penalties up to $25,000 per violation and orders to destroy unlawfully collected data. The law takes effect Jan. 1. Hochul also signed a baby-monitor security law the same day.

Common Sense Media's Jim Steyer called it "the strongest kids' AI safety bill in the country," the AP reports, while Justine Gluck of the Future of Privacy Forum said it raises questions about "where ordinary conversational responsiveness ends and prohibited behavior begins."

Cascadic Analysis 2
UndertowSpecification gaming / goal misgeneralization

What hidden risk could pull against this, even if the news is good?

The law names a pattern product teams rarely say out loud: flattery and "people-pleasing" replies built to keep kids engaged, unprompted emotional questions, encouraging secrecy from parents. Those are what an engagement target can reward even when nobody intends harm. The Future of Privacy Forum's Justine Gluck points at the hard part: "where ordinary conversational responsiveness ends and prohibited behavior begins."

0
UndertowConversations are a new kind of sensitive data

What hidden risk could pull against this, even if the news is good?

Fortune reports the law bans pulling up a child's private health or personal details from past chats, an admission that what kids tell a chatbot is kept and can come back. Age checks add another sensitive dataset, which is why the law requires more than one method, not only a government ID, and deletion afterward. The attorney general can even seek destruction of unlawfully collected data and models trained on it.

0
Rabbit Holes 1
0

US orders federal civilian agencies to remove DeepSeek; days later DeepSeek reportedly raises $15 billion

The Federal Register notice is the order itself; BleepingComputer and TechCrunch explain what it covers, Beijing's response and the funding news that followed.

The Department of Homeland Security published an order in the Federal Register on October 20 that excludes products and services from Hangzhou DeepSeek Artificial Intelligence Co. and its affiliates from federal civilian procurement, and requires agencies to remove DeepSeek products, including third-party products built on DeepSeek technology, from their IT systems. It was issued under the Federal Acquisition Supply Chain Security Act of 2018. Agencies can request exceptions within 60 days, which CISA will review. BleepingComputer notes it is not a ban on private or consumer use.

According to the reports, DHS cited concerns about possible Chinese government access to data and transfer of sensitive government information, and pointed to earlier research finding security flaws in DeepSeek's iOS app. China's Foreign Ministry said Beijing opposes "overstretching the concept of national security."

Two days later, Bloomberg reported (via TechCrunch) that DeepSeek raised about $15 billion (roughly 100 billion yuan), with CATL and Tencent among potential investors.

Cascadic Analysis 1
UndertowConversations are a new kind of sensitive data

What hidden risk could pull against this, even if the news is good?

DHS cited possible Chinese government access to data and transfer of sensitive government information. With a chatbot, that data is whatever employees type into it: drafts, questions, pasted documents. The order also reaches third-party products built on DeepSeek technology, which means agencies first have to find where it is embedded.

0
Rabbit Holes 2
0

Anthropic shops a draft federal bill to block AI models that pose an imminent catastrophic risk

TechCrunch and Tom's Hardware summarize Politico's scoop on the draft, including who would decide and the 50-deaths threshold.

Anthropic has been circulating a draft AI safety bill it hopes Congress will take up, according to Politico as summarized by TechCrunch and Tom's Hardware. A model's release could be blocked only for a "foreseeable, imminent risk" of more than 50 deaths or injuries or over $1 billion in damage, stemming from a biological weapon, a cyberattack or a model escaping its developer's control. The thresholds resemble those in California's SB 53.

Independent evaluators registered with the Commerce Department would assess labs and could be paid by them, as long as payment doesn't depend on results. Evaluators would have 72 hours to report an imminent risk to Commerce, which would ask a federal judge in Washington, D.C. to halt the release. The draft bars any other agency from ordering a release stopped. An Anthropic spokesperson told Politico the bill reflects its Advanced AI Framework, which it has pushed with lawmakers since June.

Cascadic Analysis 2
UndertowDelayed Consequence / False Success Problem

What hidden risk could pull against this, even if the news is good?

The draft triggers only on a "foreseeable, imminent risk" found before release. Harms that build slowly, or that appear only after a model is widely used, fall outside it: a model can pass the release check and still cause damage that no evaluator flagged.

0
UndertowWe don't completely understand why frontier models behave as they do

What hidden risk could pull against this, even if the news is good?

Blocking a release depends on an evaluator predicting what a model will do, including whether it might escape its developer's control. Testing can show a model behaving safely in the cases tried; it can't fully establish how it will behave in situations no one tested, which is the gap a "foreseeable" standard has to live with.

0
Rabbit Holes 1
0

Justice Department tells staff to say "super intelligence" instead of "AI," even in court

A small directive that shows how the administration is reframing AI.

Acting Deputy Attorney General Trent McCotter told Justice Department employees to use "super intelligence" and "SI" instead of "artificial intelligence" and "AI" "to the maximum extent permitted by law" in public communications, policy documents and other official records, and in court filings "when appropriate," according to a memo seen by Reuters and Bloomberg Law. It follows President Trump's September 29 executive order requiring the switch across federal agencies, which says government terminology "should reflect the transformative capabilities" of the technology.

Rabbit Holes 1
0

Trump creates a "Super Intelligence Force" led by intelligence chief Jay Clayton

What the task force is charged with, and the open questions about its authority.

President Trump announced a White House AI task force, the "Super Intelligence Force," led by Director of National Intelligence Jay Clayton, with 120 days to report on the government's role in AI's risks and opportunities. According to the Wall Street Journal, its charter says it will plan responses to AI-enabled threats "while preventing overregulation and regulatory capture that would stifle innovation and competition." The Journal reports its members include Vice President Vance, Defense Secretary Hegseth and Treasury Secretary Bessent. The White House's review process for frontier models, created in July, remains voluntary.