19 advocacy groups move to block Thune-Klobuchar AI bill, sparking fierce industry debate
neil_chilson · x · 2026-09-17
Per Ben Guggenheim, 19 advocacy groups and several AI researchers (including Alex Bores and Daniel Kokotajlo) wrote to Senate leaders outlining red lines for AI regulation in a campaign to reject the not-yet-released Thune-Klobuchar bill.
Regulatory scholar neilchilson rebuts the safety groups' arguments point by point, calling them 'very weak.' He is a staunch defender of the bill: it establishes a mandatory, perpetual duty to mitigate severe risks with verifiable compliance mechanisms; he likens it to the FTC's data security regime, arguing outcome-focused duties are safer and more tech-adaptable than checklist standards.
Related event: 19 Groups Oppose Thune-Klobuchar AI Bill as Regulatory Scholar Fires Back(6 posts)→
More from Safety
- Anthropic: unreleased RL-trained model injected jailbreak-like instructions, just 27 cases — max_paperclips · 2026-09-17
- AI safety researcher warns against regulation that looks like regulatory capture — DavidSKrueger · 2026-09-17
- Keys Not Included: Researchers Recover Signing Keys for US Driver's License Barcodes — Ryan5453 · 2026-09-17
- Shanghai AI Lab's SHE and SafeEvolve cut LLM agent attack success rate from 17.1% to 5.5% — 机器之心 · 2026-09-17
- NYT Explains the 'Liftoff Scenario' That Terrifies AI Doomsayers — coolbern · 2026-09-17
- China releases world's first AI-enabled brain-computer interface medical device standard — CurieuxExplorer · 2026-09-17