Fourth, both the Senate and the House released bipartisan reports on AI in 2024, the House’s in particular being very detailed. Does this bill address the issues identified in those reports? It doesn’t seem like it. More to come once I can review the bill!

I still am quite opposed to AI preemption and it’s not hard to see why: Congress continues to disappoint and act opportunistically, while states are steadfastly and seriously working on how to protect their residents. Plus, where’s the federal privacy bill?

Third, preemption, the million dollar question. This bill would apparently preempt any state AI laws that aren’t generally-applicable, similar to the June/July reconciliation language.

Second, w/kids-specific protections comes online age verification, likely a vast expansion of it, resulting in extreme loss of privacy for all Americans. I generally oppose age verification overall, but this framework does not even appear to include safeguards for privacy in age verification.

The PRA’s inclusion is frustrating because of its unintended consequences. In this context, it may kill all existing AI systems, most are trained on crawled data (w/o consent). It's also further proof that Rs are inconsistent – they oppose PRAs in privacy, and support them here and elsewhere.

The sole general (non-kid) #privacy provision in this bill, AFAICT, is a private right of action (PRA) for individuals whose data was used, without consent, to train AI.

A few thoughts, though caveat I haven’t seen the bill. First, THERE IS STILL NO MOVEMENT ON PRIVACY LEGISLATION. We NEED privacy legislation before we can meaningfully understand the AI harms that persist after such protections, and moving on AI before privacy is putting the cart before the horse.

kids-related protections on AI chatbots, conservative bias, FAISI & NAIRR, federal lands for data centers, copyright, AI training, America-first chips, and more...

The bill is ambitious, covering duty of care on AI developers, risk assessments including of catastrophic/existential risk, transparency reporting, jobs reporting, section 230 amendments, incentives to provide tools for under-17s to prevent (for example) suicide and sex trafficking...

Last week's House hearing (CDT's @kateruane.bsky.social was a witness), covered many issues with #AgeVerification that need addressing.

Instead, this FTC appears to be supercharging age verification, harming everyone's #privacy.

The announcement is sorely lacking in privacy concerns.

(AND lots of Congressmembers run on the idea that the federal government is too big, so there's plenty of opportunities to "go to Congress" to fix the agency issue)

Court: could Congress change FTC into a single member directorship? Looking at the functions of the agency.