Thune-Klobuchar bill backer: perpetual severe-risk duty beats check-the-box standards
neil_chilson · x · 2026-09-17
neilchilson restates his core position on the Thune-Klobuchar AI bill: its mandatory, perpetual duty to address severe risks is better, safer, and more adaptable to fast-changing technology than the check-the-box standards favored by opponents. This is part of his series of responses to the letter from 19 advocacy groups opposing the bill.
Related event: 19 Groups Oppose Thune-Klobuchar AI Bill as Regulatory Scholar Fires Back(6 posts)→
More from Safety
- OpenAI discloses six model misalignment incidents and launches a public disclosure framework — TansuYegen · 2026-09-17
- Singapore subsidizes 6-month premium AI tool subscriptions for citizens taking AI courses — reddumpling · 2026-09-17
- Halvar Flake publishes slides from his Microsoft BlueHat Singapore talk — mboehme_ · 2026-09-17
- Anthropic's Policy Chief Says Her Team Talks to the White House on a Daily Basis — pstAsiatech · 2026-09-17
- How the AI Regulatory Capture Narrative Was Built From a Mundane Security Failure — AlexTensor · 2026-09-17
- White paper reframes the HuggingFace incident via LLM semantic field miscalibration — LopsidedLevel9009 · 2026-09-17