On Thursday, two bipartisan artificial intelligence bills were introduced by US senators in response to the increasing interest in addressing issues related to the technology.
According to Reuters, there are two proposed laws. One aims to ensure transparency from the US government when utilizing AI for communication with individuals, while the other seeks to establish an office to assess the country’s competitiveness in emerging technologies.
As the use of AI continues to increase, lawmakers are starting to explore the need for updated regulations. In recent news, ChatGPT, an AI program capable of written question answering, was made widely accessible.
Read more: US FTC’s Chief Says They Seek To Curb Risks Of Artificial Intelligence
A bill was introduced by Senators Gary Peters, Mike Braun and James Lankford, which mandates U.S. government agencies to inform individuals when they are being interacted with by AI. Peters, a Democrat, chairs the Homeland Security committee while Braun and Lankford are Republicans.
The bill mandates that agencies establish a mechanism for individuals to challenge decisions made by AI.
“The federal government needs to be proactive and transparent with AI utilization and ensure that decisions aren’t being made without humans in the driver’s seat,” said Braun in a statement.
Senators Michael Bennet and Mark Warner, both Democrats, along with Republican Senator Todd Young, proposed a measure to create an Office of Global Competition Analysis that would prioritize the United States’ advancement in artificial intelligence.
“We cannot afford to lose our competitive edge in strategic technologies like semiconductors, quantum computing, and artificial intelligence to competitors like China,” Bennet said.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer scheduled three briefings for senators on artificial intelligence this week, including the first classified briefing to inform lawmakers on the topic.
Featured News
Supreme Court Rejects Uber and Lyft’s Appeal in California Gig Worker Suits
Oct 7, 2024 by
CPI
Supreme Court Sidesteps 5-Hour Energy Pricing Case, Allowing Antitrust Claims to Proceed
Oct 7, 2024 by
CPI
Tempur Sealy and Mattress Firm Argue FTC Proceedings Are Unconstitutional in New Suit
Oct 7, 2024 by
CPI
Korean Telecom Giants Face Potential $4.1 Billion Fine Over Price-Fixing Allegations
Oct 7, 2024 by
CPI
Mexico’s Antitrust Authority Targets Gruma for Market Control
Oct 7, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Refusal to Deal
Sep 27, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust’s Refusal-to-Deal Doctrine: The Emperor Has No Clothes
Sep 27, 2024 by
Erik Hovenkamp
Why All Antitrust Claims are Refusal to Deal Claims and What that Means for Policy
Sep 27, 2024 by
Ramsi Woodcock
The Aspen Misadventure
Sep 27, 2024 by
Roger Blair & Holly P. Stidham
Refusal to Deal in Antitrust Law: Evolving Jurisprudence and Business Justifications in the Align Technology Case
Sep 27, 2024 by
Timothy Hsieh