SB 1047 debate turns on whether rogue-AI risk or catastrophic misuse came first
deanwball · x · 2026-07-23
Dean Ball argues that the existence of mechanisms like a Frontier Model Division and kill switches in SB 1047 shows that loss of control / rogue AI was a real motivation behind the bill.
He adds two nuances:
- The bill was initially more driven by rogue-AI concerns, but some of that was later dialed back.
- In his view, today’s models look less likely to “go rogue” than they did in 2024.
The exchange is about how to read the bill’s intent: whether catastrophic misuse or loss-of-control risks were the primary driver.
More from AGI Musings
- Superintelligence will be maximum good, not stupid or evil, argues Patterson — davidpattersonx · 2026-09-11
- Mathematician Daniel Litt Launches Problem Repo to Track Human vs AI Progress: 15 Problems, 1 Solved — littmath · 2026-09-11
- Should AI models be taught morality? Breakout incidents expose missing ethical training — Pfungus_ · 2026-09-11
- SoftBank's Masayoshi Son predicts 100 trillion self-replicating AIs: "humans' era as top life form is ending" — Puzzleheaded-King584 · 2026-09-11
- We are witnessing the unreasonable effectiveness of inference-time scaling — sqcai · 2026-09-11
- The AlphaFold lesson: AI-solved math may mean fewer mathematicians needed — kiki-le-koala · 2026-09-11