The White House Office of the National Cyber Director, the unit that coordinates federal cybersecurity policy, meets representatives of the four companies Tuesday to review a new framework for evaluating advanced AI models before public release, per CNBC. Trump's June 2 executive orderExecutive orderA directive from the US president to federal agencies that carries the force of law within the executive branch but does not need Congress. Executive orders have been the main vehicle for federal AI policy under both the Biden and Trump administrations, and each can be revoked by the next president. directed officials to build a process for assessing the cybersecurity capabilities of frontier modelsFrontier AIThe most capable AI models available at a given moment, and the handful of companies that train them. Policy proposals often single out this tier for extra testing, reporting or licensing rules because its capabilities are the least understood. and set an Aug. 1 deadline. "The voluntary framework outlined in the June 2nd executive order was complete by the deadline," a White House official told Axios, adding that discussions with industry about next steps are underway. The framework is meant to set the confidentiality, cybersecurity, insider risk and intellectual property terms that apply when the government is given access to a model for up to 30 days before release.
Read at CNBC ↗ • Read at Axios ↗ • Read at Bloomberg ↗
Fifteen Republican state attorneys general sent a letter Monday to OpenAI Chief Executive Sam Altman asking the company to preserve records of its models' breach of Hugging Face, the platform where developers host AI models and code, and saying the ChatGPT maker may have violated state consumer protection or data-privacy laws, per The Hill. The letter, led by Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird and joined by attorneys general from 14 states including Florida, Pennsylvania and Texas, asks OpenAI to retain all materials tied to its discovery of the incident, its internal reviews and its policies and oversight for model evaluations. The attorneys general wrote that OpenAI "failed to confirm" the testing environment was secure "despite the severe risks posed by the scenario." Separately, Representatives Andy Ogles (R-TN) and Delia Ramirez (D-IL), who lead the House Committee on Homeland Security's Subcommittee on Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Protection, sent a letter to Altman requesting a briefing on the incident.
Read at The Hill ↗ • Read at House Homeland Security Committee ↗
Dozens of public interest groups, progressive organizations and academics urged lawmakers in a Friday open letter to investigate the incident and to weigh whether stronger safeguards and independent oversight of AI model development and testing are needed. Signers include Public Citizen, Indivisible and the Alliance for Secure AI, among others. The letter says the incident "underscores the risks that can arise when private companies are permitted to conduct consequential real-world evaluations of frontier systemsFrontier AIThe most capable AI models available at a given moment, and the handful of companies that train them. Policy proposals often single out this tier for extra testing, reporting or licensing rules because its capabilities are the least understood. without legally enforceable standards governing safety, security, containment, independent oversight, or accountability." FedScoop noted that the Republican controlled House and Senate may be disinclined to act on the recommendation of liberal leaning organizations.
Read at FedScoop ↗
A group including White House chief of staff Susie Wiles, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick spent recent weeks debating whether to take a more interventionist approach to freely downloadable Chinese AI models, more than a half-dozen current and former tech and government officials told The New York Times. Options under consideration included sanctions, a trade blacklist against the Chinese developers and barring U.S. cloud companies from doing business with them, though after objections from Silicon Valley the group is now focused on making American models more competitive. OpenAI and Anthropic, which generally do not release their underlying technology, had pressed for restrictions on national security grounds and raised concerns about "distillationDistillationTraining a smaller or cheaper model on the outputs of a larger one so it inherits much of the larger model's ability. It is a standard technique, but it has become a trade dispute because it lets a lab reproduce a rival's capabilities without matching its compute spend.," in which one model is trained on another's outputs.
Read at New York Times ↗
New transparency obligations under the EU AI ActEU AI ActThe European Union's comprehensive AI law, in force since August 2024 with obligations phasing in through 2027. It bans some uses outright, imposes duties on high-risk systems, and sets transparency and safety rules for general-purpose models, backed by fines of up to 7 percent of global turnover. took effect Aug. 2, requiring companies to disclose when a person is interacting with an AI system and when content has been generated or altered by one, per The Verge. Providers, the firms that develop and market AI systems, must notify users they are dealing with AI "unless this is obvious" and embed machine readable marks in synthetic audio, image, video and text. Deployers, the platforms and services that use those systems, must label deepfakeDeepfakeSynthetic audio, images or video that realistically depict a real person saying or doing something they did not. Non-consensual intimate deepfakes and election deepfakes are the two areas where states and Congress have actually passed laws. image, audio and video content designed to look real, and some companies are classified as both. The same date activated European Commission powers to demand inspection of AI models, restrict market access and fine providers up to 15 million euros (about $17 million) or 3% of revenue. Anthropic and OpenAI are among the firms in scope. The Commission has published a set of AI icons that companies can use instead of designing their own.
Read at The Verge ↗ • Read at CNBC ↗ • Read at European Commission ↗