Yann LeCunChief AI scientist at Meta, publicly rebuffed supporters of California’s controversial AI safety law. SB1047on Wednesday. His criticism got here just at some point after Geoffrey Hintonalso known as the “Godfather of AI,” supported the laws. This stark disagreement between two pioneers of artificial intelligence highlights the deep divisions throughout the AI ​​community regarding the long run of regulation.
The California legislature has SB 1047 passedwho’s now waiting for the governor Gavin Newsom's signatureThe bill has turn into a lightning rod for the talk over AI regulation. It would hold developers of large-scale AI models that cause catastrophic harm liable in the event that they don't take adequate safety measures. The laws only applies to models that cost at the least $100 million to coach and that operate in California, the world's fifth-largest economy.
The battle of the AI ​​titans: LeCun vs. Hinton on SB 1047
LeCun, known for his pioneering work in deep learning, argued that most of the bill’s supporters wanted a “distorted view” of the near-term possibilities of AI. “The bias is on account of their inexperience, naivety about how difficult the following steps in AI will probably be, gross overestimation of their employers' lead and their ability to make rapid progress,” he wrote on Twitter, now generally known as X.
His comments were a direct response to Hinton’s advocacy of a open letter signed by over 100 current and former employees of leading AI firms, including OpenAI, Google DeepMind, and Anthropic. The letter, presented to Governor Newsom on September 9, urged him to sign SB 1047 into law, citing potential “serious risks“ created by powerful AI models, reminiscent of expanded access to biological weapons and cyberattacks on critical infrastructure.
This public disagreement between two AI pioneers underscores the complexity of regulating a rapidly evolving technology. Hinton, the left Google last yr to talk more openly about AI risks represents a growing group of researchers who imagine that AI systems could soon pose an existential threat to humanity. LeCun, then again, consistently argues that such fears are premature and potentially harmful to open research.
Inside SB 1047: The controversial bill to revamp AI regulation
The debate over SB 1047 has shaken traditional political alliances. Supporters include Elon Muskdespite his previous criticism of the writer of the law, Senator Scott Wiener. Opponents include Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi and Mayor of San Francisco London breedalong with several major technology firms and enterprise capitalists.
Anthropic, an AI company that originally opposed the bill, modified its stance after several amendments and stated that the bill “The advantages probably outweigh the prices.” This shift underscores the evolving nature of the laws and the continued negotiations between lawmakers and the technology industry.
Critics of SB 1047 argue that it could stifle innovation and drawback smaller firms and open source projects. Andrew Ng, founding father of DeepLearning.AI, wrote in TIME magazine that the bill “makes the elemental mistake of regulating a general-purpose technology relatively than the applications of that technology.”
But supporters insist that the potential risks of unregulated AI development far outweigh these concerns. They argue that the bill's deal with models with budgets above $100 million ensures that it primarily affects large, well-resourced firms which might be in a position to implement robust security measures.
Divided Silicon Valley: How SB 1047 is dividing the tech world
The participation of Current employees Criticism from firms against the law adds complexity to the talk, suggesting that there are disagreements inside these organizations about the correct balance between innovation and security.
As Governor Newsom considers whether to sign SB 1047, he faces a call that would shape the long run of AI development not only in California, but potentially across the United States. With the European Union already moving ahead with its own AI lawCalifornia's decision could influence whether the U.S. takes a more proactive or cautious approach to federal AI regulation.
The conflict between LeCun and Hinton is a microcosm of the larger debate over AI safety and regulation, highlighting the challenge policymakers face in crafting laws that address legitimate safety concerns without unduly hindering technological progress.
As the AI ​​field continues to advance at a rapid pace, the end result of this legislative battle in California could set an important precedent for a way societies navigate the guarantees and dangers of increasingly powerful artificial intelligence systems. The technology world, policymakers and the general public will probably be watching closely as Governor Newsom weighs his decision in the approaching weeks.
