California AI Regulation Bill Advances to Assembly Vote with Key Amendments
- By John K. Waters
- 08/19/24
California’s "Safe and Secure Innovation for Frontier Artificial Intelligence Models Act" (Senate Bill 1047), spearheaded by Senator Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), has cleared the Assembly Appropriations Committee with some significant amendments. The bill, aimed at establishing rigorous safety standards for large-scale artificial intelligence (AI) systems, is set for a vote on the Assembly floor on Aug. 20 and must pass by Aug. 31 to move forward.
SB 1047 was crafted to regulate the development of advanced AI models by setting clear, actionable safety requirements, as well as regulatory measures. It targets AI models that are especially powerful and expensive to develop, with the goal of balancing innovation with public safety.
The bill sets standards for AI models with significant computational power — specifically, models that utilize 1026 floating-point operations (FLOPS) per second and cost more than $100 million to train. These models are referred to as "frontier" AI systems.
Among other provisions, the bill establishes risk assessment, safety, security, and testing requirements the developer of a covered AI model must fulfill before training the covered model, using the covered model, or making the covered model available for public or commercial use.
It requires, beginning Jan. 1, 2028, the developer of a covered model to annually retain a third-party auditor to perform an independent audit of compliance with the requirements of the bill.
The bill has undergone substantial revisions based on industry feedback, perhaps most notably from Anthropic, a leading AI research organization known for its work in developing advanced AI systems with a focus on safety, alignment, and ethical considerations. The aim of the amendments is to balance innovation and safety, Weiner said in a statement.
"We can advance both innovation and safety; the two are not mutually exclusive," Wiener said. "While the amendments do not reflect 100% of the changes requested by all stakeholders, we've addressed core concerns from industry leaders and made adjustments to accommodate diverse needs, including those of the open source community."
Major Amendments to SB 1047
- Criminal Penalties for Perjury Removed: The bill now imposes only civil penalties for false statements to authorities, addressing concerns about the potential misuse of criminal penalties.
- Elimination of the Frontier Model Division (FMD): The proposed new regulatory body has been removed. Enforcement will continue through the Attorney General's office, with some FMD functions transferred to the Government Operations Agency.
- Adjusted Legal Standards: The standard for developer compliance has shifted from "reasonable assurance" to "reasonable care," a well-established common law standard, including elements like adherence to NIST safety standards.
- New Threshold for Fine-Tuned Models: Models fine-tuned at a cost of less than $10 million are exempt from the bill's requirements, focusing regulatory burden on larger-scale projects.
- Narrowed Pre-Harm Enforcement: The Attorney General's authority to seek civil penalties is now restricted to situations where actual harm has occurred or imminent threats to public safety exist.
Support and Criticism
SB 1047 has garnered support from prominent AI researchers, including Geoffrey Hinton and Yoshua Bengio, who emphasize the importance of balancing innovation with safety. Hinton praised the bill for its sensible approach, highlighting the need for legislation that addresses the risks of powerful AI systems.
However, the bill has also faced criticism, particularly from startup founders and industry leaders. Critics argue that the bill's thresholds and liability provisions could stifle innovation and disproportionately burden smaller developers. Anjney Midha, General Partner at Silicon Valley-based VC firm Andreessen Horowitz, criticized the bill's focus on model-level regulations rather than specific misuse or malicious applications. He warned that stringent requirements could drive innovation overseas and hinder the open source community.