Regulation

State governments have the authority to allow AI companies to coordinate on safety measures without running afoul of federal antitrust laws.

This series aims to set out what a meaningful, multistakeholder, and globally relevant AI accountability mechanism should look like.

As the risks of artificial intelligence continue to mount, the expert analysis in this series engages the fundamental question of what ought to happen when AI risks manifest into…

Taipei should extend its new semiconductor equipment certification system to test industrial AI agents, constrain their permissions, and monitor them after deployment.

Cautionary tales show well-intentioned procedural requirements can tie up decisionmaking without meaningfully enhancing outcomes.

A series of Supreme Court rulings have left the federal government with a narrow path to regulating open-weight AI models.

The introduction of Muse, Meta's new 24/7 AI assistant, carries significant implications for users' autonomy and data privacy.

States should treat spyware governance as a top-tier political priority and work toward a binding, enforceable regulatory framework.

Tech company leaders' warnings about the dangers of AI demand urgent international legal efforts to regulate artificial intelligence.

If tech leaders are serious about oversight to curtail AI risk, they will need to endow evaluators with independence, information, money, and clout to enforce decisions.

As the U.S. and China compete on AI, concepts such as export controls can no longer determine who leads in that or across a range of other emerging technology.

Neither banning Chinese advanced AI models nor ignoring their risks to national security will serve American interests.