Connect with us

Tech

Trump Takes Aim at State AI Laws in Draft Executive Order

Published

on

Trump Takes Aim at State AI Laws in Draft Executive Order


US President Donald Trump is considering signing an executive order that would seek to challenge state efforts to regulate artificial intelligence through lawsuits and the withholding federal funding, WIRED has learned.

A draft of the order viewed by WIRED directs US Attorney General Pam Bondi to create an “AI Litigation Task Force,” whose purpose is to sue states in court for passing AI regulations that allegedly violate federal laws governing things like free speech and interstate commerce.

Trump could sign the order, which is currently titled “Eliminating State Law Obstruction of National AI Policy,” as early as this week, according to four sources familiar with the matter. A White House spokesperson told WIRED that “discussion about potential executive orders is speculation.”

The order says that the AI Litigation Task Force will work with several White House technology advisors, including the Special Advisor for AI and Crypto David Sacks, to determine which states are violating federal laws detailed in the order. It points to state regulations that “require AI models to alter their truthful outputs” or compel AI developers to “report information in a manner that would violate the First Amendment or any other provision of the Constitution,” according to the draft.

The order specifically cites recently enacted AI safety laws in California and Colorado that require AI developers to publish transparency reports about how they train models, among other provisions. Big Tech trade groups, including Chamber of Progress—which is backed by Andreessen Horowitz, Google, and OpenAI—have vigorously lobbied against these efforts, which they describe as a “patchwork” approach to AI regulation that hampers innovation. These groups are lobbying instead for a light touch set of federal laws to guide AI progress.

“If the President wants to win the AI race, the American people need to know that AI is safe and trustworthy,” says Cody Venzke, senior policy counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union. “This draft only undermines that trust.”

The order comes as Silicon Valley has been upping the pressure on proponents of state AI regulations. For example, a super PAC funded by Andreessen Horowitz, OpenAI cofounder Greg Brockman, and Palantir cofounder Joe Lonsdale recently announced a campaign against New York Assembly member Alex Bores, the author of a state AI safety bill.

House Republicans have also renewed their effort to pass a blanket moratorium on states introducing laws regulating AI after an earlier version of the measure failed.



Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Tech

New York Bans Government Employees from Insider Trading on Prediction Markets

Published

on

New York Bans Government Employees from Insider Trading on Prediction Markets


New York has banned state employees from using insider information to trade on prediction markets. In an executive order signed today and viewed by WIRED, Governor Kathy Hochul forbade the state’s government workforce from using “any nonpublic information obtained in the course of their official duties” to participate on prediction market platforms, or to help others profit using those services.

“Getting rich by betting on inside information is corruption, plain and simple,” Hochul said in a statement provided to WIRED. “Our actions will ensure that public servants work for the people they represent, not their own personal enrichment. While Donald Trump and DC Republicans turn a blind eye to the ethical Wild West they’ve created, New York is stepping up to lead by example and stamp out insider trading.”

The order was not spurred by any specific insider trading incidents involving New York state employees. “There are no known instances of this behavior to date,” says New York State Executive Chamber deputy communications director Sean Butler.

This is the latest in a wave of initiatives meant to curb insider trading on prediction markets like Kalshi and Polymarket, the two most popular of these platforms in the United States. California Governor Gavin Newsom issued a similar executive order last month, banning Golden State employees from prediction market insider trading. Yesterday, Illinois Governor JB Pritzker followed suit.

In addition to these executive orders, Congress has also introduced several bills intended to curb market manipulation and corruption in the industry, including legislation barring elected officials from participating in prediction markets. Some individual politicians are discouraging or outright barring their staff from buying event contracts on those platforms. According to CNN, the White House recently warned executive branch staff not to trade on prediction markets. When WIRED asked the White House about its policies on these markets earlier this year, it pointed to existing regulations prohibiting gambling activity but did not respond to requests for clarification on whether it considered prediction market participation to be gambling.

The Commodity Exchange Act, which covers derivative markets, does already prohibit insider trading, which means that both public servants and people in the private sector are breaking the law if they enact insider trades on event contracts. Rather than establishing new rules, the New York executive order serves primarily to underline the state’s commitment to enforcing existing laws and to clarify how these laws and its Code of Ethics for employees apply to prediction markets.

However, with so many high-profile examples of suspected insider trading on Polymarket focused on geopolitical events, from the capture of former Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro to strikes in the ongoing Iran war, many onlookers—including prominent lawmakers—see this as such a combustible issue. They’re racing to write laws and orders restating and emphasizing existing rules.

“This makes sense, and we already do this. At Kalshi, insider trading violates our rules, and we enforce them when we catch insiders,” Kalshi spokesperson Elisabeth Diana says. “Government employees should be aware that trading on federally regulated markets using material nonpublic information violates the law.” (Polymarket did not immediately respond to a request for comment.)

Facing backlash, Polymarket and Kalshi have recently announced new initiatives to combat insider trading.

In February, Kalshi publicized its decision to suspend and fine two individuals for violating its market manipulation policies; the company also confirmed that it had flagged the cases to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the federal agency overseeing prediction markets. In March, it rolled out a beef up market surveillance arm, preemptively blocking political candidates from trading on markets related to their campaigns.



Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

The Best Chromebooks Are Doing Their Best to Course Correct

Published

on

The Best Chromebooks Are Doing Their Best to Course Correct


I was delighted to see that the Acer Chromebook Plus 516 didn’t skimp on a crappy touchpad. That goes a long way toward improving the experiencing of actually using the laptop on a moment-by-moment basis. I wasn’t annoyed every time I had to click-and-drag or select a bit of text. This one’s biggest weakness is definitely the screen, which is true of just about every cheap Chromebook I’ve tested. The colors are ugly and desaturated, giving the whole thing a sickly green tint. It’s also not the sharpest in the world, as it’s stretching 1920 x 1200 pixels across a large, 16-inch screen. But in terms of usability and performance, the Acer Chromebook Plus 516 is a great value, combining an Intel Core i3 processor with 8 GB of RAM and a 128 GB of storage. For a Chromebook that’s often on sale for $350, it’s a steal.

While we’re here, let’s go even cheaper, shall we? Asus has two dirt-cheap Chromebooks that I tested last year that I was mildly impressed by. The Asus Chromebook CX14 and CX15. Notice in the name that these are not “Chromebook Plus” models, meaning they can be configured with less RAM and storage, and even use lower-powered processors. That’s exactly what you get on the cheaper configurations of the CX14 and CX15, which is how you sometimes get prices down to as low as $130. I definitely recommend the version with 8 GB of RAM, but regardless of which you choose, the both the CX14 and larger CX15 are mildly attractive laptops. You’d know that’s a big compliment if you’ve seen just how ugly Chromebooks of this price have been in the past.

With these, though, I appreciate the relatively thin bezels and chassis thickness, as well as the larger touchpad and comfortable keyboard. The CX15 even comes in a striking blue color. The touchpad isn’t great, nor is the display. Like the Acer Chromebook Plus 516, it suffers from poor color reproduction and only goes up to 250 nits of brightness. It only has a 720p webcam too, which makes video calls a bit rough. But that’s going to be true of nearly all the competition (and there isn’t much).

Of the two models, I definitely prefer the CX14 though, as it doesn’t have a numberpad and off-center touchpad, which I’ve always found to be awkward to use. Look—no one’s going to love using a computer that costs the less than $200, but if it’s what you can afford, the Asus Chromebook CX14 will at least get you by without too much frustration.

Whatever you do, don’t just head over to Amazon and buy whatever ancient Chromebook is selling for $100 for your kid. It’s worth the extra cash to get something with better battery life, a more modern look, and decent performance.

Other Good Chromebooks We’ve Tested

We’ve tested dozens and dozens of Chromebooks over the past years, having reviewed every major release across the spectrum of price. Unlike Macs and Windows laptops, Chromebooks tends to stick around a bit longer though, and aren’t refreshed as often. I stand by my picks above, but here are a few standouts from our testing that are still worth buying for the right person.

Photograph: Daniel Thorp-Lancaster



Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Interview: Critical local infrastructure is missing link in UK cyber resilience | Computer Weekly

Published

on

Interview: Critical local infrastructure is missing link in UK cyber resilience | Computer Weekly


Critical local infrastructure that supports council services, social care services and local transport in the UK is falling through the gaps in government and business planning for cyber resilience, claims Jonathan Lee, director of cyber strategy at cyber security company TrendAI.

In an interview with Computer Weekly, Lee says that municipal areas, such as London or Greater Manchester, could be at risk from multiple cyber attacks that could damage local infrastructure, causing escalating problems for residents that could add up to severe disruption.

“We need to be thinking about what would happen if multiple attacks happened at the same time across the city region – and the human impact of not being able to do your job properly, not being able to travel around and not being able to deliver public services,” he says.

The Cyber Security and Resilience Bill (CSRB), which is currently going through Parliament, aims to ensure that critical national services, such as healthcare, water, transport and energy, are protected against cyber attacks that cost the economy billions of pounds a year. But local infrastructure has been relatively neglected, claims Lee.

The National Cyber Security Centre’s (NCSC) Cyber Assurance Framework, for example, aims to help operators of critical national infrastructure (CNI) demonstrate a base level of cyber security preparedness – but it is not mandatory, and not every organisation that should implement it is implementing it.

Whole of society risk

“We need to be more stringent in making sure that people are taking this seriously and are looking not just at their own organisation, but are looking at the whole of society risk,” says Lee.

Attacks on public services, such as council-run social care, can have a catastrophic, knock-on effect on the NHS and patient care, he adds.

There is a need for more “top-down” advice for regional infrastructure providers, from organisations such as the NCSC, which is not as well known as it could be among the companies and public sector bodies that provide local infrastructure.

“The message has got to be diffused down into local levels to ensure that a consistent message is spread out, and that can also be through industry partners. That is something I feel quite strongly about,” says Lee.

The Cyber Essentials programme, which has been updated to include new requirements for organisations to use multifactor authentication (MFA), and requirements for cloud providers to patch vulnerabilities within 14 days, has helped build resilience, but only for organisations that choose to adhere to it.

Keeping the resilience score

The UK government is also intending to publish a Cyber Action Plan in the coming months, which will guide organisations to get basic security right and improve their cyber security over time.

Although there is no shortage of initiatives and action plans, there is a danger that many of these plans will be left on a shelf.

One approach is for organisations to rate themselves on a scorecard for cyber resilience, on a scale of, say, 1 to 100, and to report their progress back to board-level directors.

“We need a mechanism to measure how impactful these interventions are, whether it be things like the Cyber Assessment Framework, Cyber Essentials or legislation,” says Lee.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending