Every time I dive into tech policy itâs like this. The real (good) solutions are never incentivized. This should be âapply updates as feature switches and be ready to turn off the update immediately upon noticing a problemâ or something like that. THAT is real tech policy. Not ⌠this.
This is the âkill switchâ language from the bill. This already exists. It only doesnât exist in movies. You can do this with *any* service built since ⌠forever? No really, this is basic service stuff. So the bill was either watered down or written incompetently. Itâs a joke.
Just. A kill switch? What. Does anyone know about this? Is it a dumb as it sounds? I canât imagine itâs anything other than being able to stop a service or cluster. Which just. This world hurts brains.
BREAKING NEWS: The measure, SB 1047, would have held companies legally liable for harms caused by AI and even enabled a "kill switch" if systems went rogue.
The measure, known as SB 1047, was one of the nationâs most far-reaching regulations on the booming AI industry. It divided Silicon Valley over the balance between artificial intelligence safety and tech innovation.
Youâre âthat houseâ now in the cool way.
ALT: a man in a suit and tie is applauding .
When Trump first chose "America First" as his slogan American Historians were like "um, yeah, that seems kinda bad." Now that he's moved on to praising "the late great Charles Lindbergh" I think we can dispense with the qualifications.
The White Soxâs Twitter feed is amazing. Worth going to the other site for. x.com/whitesox/sta...
The story is in the top 5 of all games for me. Itâs like a very good book.
Get in Millennials, we're rebuilding webrings!
