The Implications of Trump's Win for AI

Today on the AI Daily Brief the.

AI implications of last night's elections.

The AI Daily Brief is a daily podcast and video about the most important.

News and discussions in AI. To join the conversation, follow the Discord link in our show. Notes.

Hello friends. Yesterday was of course a very consequential.

Election where frankly we have a little.

Bit more certainty around what happened than I thought we were going to. And so today what we're going to do is sort of a long read style show, although we're going to do it in the immediate aftermath as people try to make sense of what the implications are specifically for artificial intelligence. So what we have are one full op ed plus two segments of pieces all about AI in the elections and what happens next. And the first is a segment from Kevin Roose in the New York Times from a larger piece called what a.

Trump Victory Means for Tech.

The section is called AI Progress Accelerates. By the way, of course these will be read by the 11 Labs version of myself.

And so here's the first AI progress accelerates. Neither Mr. Trump nor Ms. Harris said much about artificial intelligence on the campaign trail, but it's a safe bet that AI progress will continue under a second Trump administration and might even speed up. Some of the tech elites who supported Mr. Trump, including the venture capitalist Marc Andreessen, are associated with the accelerationist wing of the AI movement and have opposed any AI regulations that could slow down the industry. To be honest, I'd bet against Mr. Trump's spending much time thinking about AI at all. He might delegate it to Mr. Vance, who does seem to have some interest in the subject. But to the extent Mr. Trump's views on AI will be shaped by the people in his orbit, it's likely to be in the direction of encouraging American tech companies to race ahead of rivals in China and elsewhere, and removing regulatory roadblocks that might get in their way. Interestingly, Mr. Musk is a bit of a wild card here. He runs an AI company, xai, that would benefit from light touch regulation. But he also worries about existential risk from AI and supported a controversial California bill that would have imposed safety standards on AI models, which many AI companies opposed.

Alright, back to non AI NLW here. This one didn't really have all that much in it. Effectively, Roose's argument is that Trump is unlikely to spend all that much time thinking about AI that JD Vance might, given that he's a former vc. The most interesting thing about this piece is the question of Elon Musk, where Rus has rightly identified that on the one hand he has the existential risk worries, but on the other hand he could benefit from light touch regulation. I think Roose is right to call out that. That could create some interesting tension to the extent that Musk has a seat at the policy table when it comes to AI, although there's no guarantee that.

That'S actually how it's going to play out.

All right, next up, we're going to.

Read a broader piece, or AI me.

Is going to read a broader piece by Kyle Wiggers in TechCrunch called what.

Trump's victory could mean for AI regulation A grueling election cycle has come to a close. Donald Trump will be the 47th president of the US and with Republicans in control of the Senate and possibly the House, his allies are poised to bring sea change to the highest levels of government. The effects will be acutely felt in the AI industry, which has largely rallied against federal policymaking. Trump has repeatedly said he plans to dismantle Biden's AI policy framework on day one and has aligned himself with kingmakers who've sharply criticized all but the lightest touch regulations. Biden's approach Biden's AI policy came into force through executive order passed in October 2023. Congressional inaction on regulation precipitated the executive order, whose precepts are voluntary, not compulsory. The AI EO addresses everything from advancing AI in healthcare to developing guidance designed to mitigate risks of IP theft. But two of its more consequential provisions, which have raised the ire of some Republicans, pertain to AI security risks and real world safety impacts. One provision directs companies developing powerful AI models to report to the government how they're training and securing these models and to provide the results of tests designed to probe for model vulnerabilities. The other provision directs the Commerce Department's National Institute of Standards and Technology to author guidance that helps companies identify and correct four flaws in models, including biases. The AIEO accomplished much in the last year. The Commerce Department established the US AI Safety Institute, a body to study risks in AI systems inclusive of systems with defense applications. It also released new software to help improve the trustworthiness of AI and tested major new AI models through agreements with OpenAI and Anthropic. Critics allied with Trump argue that the EO's reporting requirements are onerous and effectively force companies to disclose their trade secrets. During a House hearing in March, Representative Nancy Mace said they could scare away would be innovators and impede more ChatGPT type breakthroughs because the requirements lean on an interpretation of the Defense Production Act. They've also been labeled by some Republicans in Congress as an example of executive overreach. At a Senate Hearing in July, Trump's running mate, J.D. vance, expressed concerns that preemptive overregulation attempts would entrench the tech incumbents that we already have. Vance has also been supportive of antitrust, including efforts by FTC chair Lina Khan, who's spearheading investigations of big tech companies. Acqui hires of AI startups. Several Republicans have equated NIST's work on AI with censorship of conservative speech. They accuse the Biden administration of attempting to steer AI development with liberal notions about disinformation and bias. Senator Ted Cruz recently slammed nest's WOKE AI safety standards as a plan to control speech based on amorphous social harms. When I'm reelected, trump said at a rally in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, last December, I will cancel Biden's artificial intelligence executive order and ban the use of AI to censor the speech of American citizens on Day one. Replacing the AI EO so what could replace Biden's AI eo? Little can be gleaned from the AI executive orders Trump signed during his last presidential term, which founded national AI research institutes and directed federal agencies to prioritize AI, R&D. His EOS mandated that agencies protect civil liberties, privacy, and American values in applying AI, help workers gain AI relevant skills, and promote the use of trustworthy technologies. During his campaign, Trump promised policies that would support AI development rooted in free speech and human flourishing, but declined to go into detail. Some Republicans have said that they want Nest to focus on AI's physical safety risks, including its ability to help adversaries build bioweapons, which Biden's EO also addresses. But they've also shied away from endorsing new restrictions on AI, which could jeopardize portions of NIST's guidance. Indeed, the fate of the AISI, which is housed within NIST, is murky. While it has a budget director and partnerships with AI research institutes worldwide, the AISI could be wound down with a simple repeal of Biden's eo. In an open letter in October, a coalition of companies, nonprofits and universities called on Congress to enact legislation codifying the A S E before the end of the year. Trump has acknowledged that AI is very dangerous and that it'll require massive amounts of power to develop and run, suggesting a willingness to engage with the growing risks from AI. This being the case, Sarah Kreps, a political scientist who focuses on US Defense policy doesn't expect major AI regulation to emerge from the White House in the next four years. I don't know that Trump's views on AI regulation will rise to the level of antipathy that causes him to repeal the Biden AI EO, she told TechCrunch. Trade and state Dean Ball, a research fellow at George Mason University, agrees that Trump's victory likely augurs a light touch regulatory regime, one that'll rely on the application of existing law rather than the creation of new laws. However, Ball predicts that this may embolden state governments, particularly in Democratic strongholds like California, to try to fill the void. State led efforts are well underway. In March, Tennessee passed a law protecting voice artists from AI cloning. This summer, Colorado adopted a tiered risk based approach to AI deployments. And in September, California governor Gavin Newsom signed dozens of AI related safety bills, a few of which require companies to publish details about their AI training. State policymakers have introduced close to 700 pieces of AI legislation this year alone. How the federal government will respond to these challenges is unclear, Ball said. Hamid Ekbia, a professor at Syracuse University studying public affairs, believes that Trump's protectionist policies could have AI regulatory implications. He expects the Trump administration to impose tighter export controls on China, for instance, including controls on the technologies necessary for developing AI. The Biden administration already has in place a number of bans on the export of AI chips and models. However, some Chinese firms are reportedly using loopholes to access the tools through cloud services. The global regulation of AI will suffer as a consequence of new controls, despite the circumstances that call for more global cooperation, Ekbia said. The political and geopolitical ramifications of this can be huge, enabling more authoritarian and oppressive uses of AI across the globe. Should Trump enact tariffs on the tech necessary to build AI, it could also squeeze the capital needed to fund AI R and D, says Matt Mittelstedt, another research fellow at George Mason University. During his campaign, Trump proposed a 10% tariff on all US imports and 60% on Chinese made products. Perhaps the biggest impact will come from trade policies, Mittelstedt said. Expect any potential tariffs to have a massive economic impact on the AI sector. Of course, it's early. And while Trump for the most part avoided addressing AI on the campaign trail, much of his platform, like his plan to restrict H1B visas and embrace oil and gas, could have downstream effects on the AI industry. Sandra Wachter, a professor in data ethics at the Oxford Internet Institute, urged regulators, regardless of their political affiliations, not to lose sight of the dangers of AI for its opportunities. These risks exist regardless of where you sit on the political spectrum, she said. These harms do not believe in geography and do not care about party lines. I can only hope that AI governance will not be reduced to a partisan issue. It is an issue that affects all of us everywhere. We all have to work together to find good global solutions.

All right, back to real NLW here. And once again we have a big shrug, arms thrown up. I have no idea specifically what Kyle is pointing out here is that what.

Trump has promised to not do or.

To repeal in the case of the Biden AI executive order is clearer than what he's promised to do when it.

Comes to accelerating AI.

I think Kyle is right to identify that one of the areas where AI is going to overlap with the presidency in a significant way is as it relates to trade policy and I think.

Foreign policy more broadly.

China policy is obviously going to be a big part of the next Trump administration, and AI is likely to be a big part of China policy Today's.

Episode is brought to you by Vanta. Whether you're starting or scaling your company's security program, demonstrating top notch security practices and establishing trust is more important than ever. Vanta automates compliance for ISO 27001, SOC2GDPR and leading AI frameworks like ISO 42001 and NIST AI Risk Management Framework, saving you time and money while helping you build customer trust. Plus you can streamline security reviews by automating questionnaires and demonstrating your security posture with a customer facing trust center. All powered by Vanta AI. Over 8,000 global companies like LangChain, Leela AI and Factory AI use Vanta to demonstrate AI trust and prove security in real time. Learn more@vanta.comnlw that's vanta.comnlw Today's episode is.

Brought to you by Superintelligent. Every single business workflow and function is being remade and reimagined with artificial intelligence. There is a huge challenge, however, of going from the potential of AI to actually capturing that value. And that gap is what superintelligent is dedicated to filling. Superintelligent accelerates AI adoption and engagement to help teams actually use AI to increase productivity and drive business value. An interactive AI use case registry gives your company full visibility into how people.

Are using artificial intelligence right now.

Pair that with capabilities, building content in.

The form of tutorials, learning paths and.

A use case library and superintelligent helps people inside your company show how they're getting value out of AI while providing resources for people to put that inspiration into action. The next three teams that sign up with 100 or more seats are going to get free embedded consulting. That's a process by which our super intelligent team sits with your organization, figures out the specific use cases that matter most to you, and helps actually ensure support for adoption of those use cases.

To drive real value.

Go to BeSuper AI to learn more.

About this AI enablement network. And now back to the show.

Now one analysis that I did think was pretty interesting is this idea that perhaps in the absence of a strong, clear federal regulatory regime when it comes to AI, state governments might intervene. First, I could absolutely see that happening, and second, if it does, I could also see that being a prompt for a second Trump White House to try to get more involved in pushing through their vision of whatever a light touch.

Regulatory regime will be.

Finally, let's turn it over to our third segment, which was in the information in Stephanie Palazzolo's newsletter. It's called the battle over Open Source AI will be settled in Trump's Presidency.

Handing it back over to the 11 Labs version of myself for this last read.

Donald Trump's victory in Tuesday's presidential election has a lot of implications for AI, some are clear. Trump has said he will repeal President Joe Biden's AI Executive Order, which requires companies training large AI models to share information about them with the federal government in another key area, though, Trump's stance isn't certain. That's the hotly contested question of whether freely available open source AI such as Meta platforms llama models are a threat to national security. The issue was put in the spotlight last Friday when Reuters reported that Meta's LLAMA models were being used by Chinese researchers to build AI tools for potential military applications. What made the report particularly problematic for Meta is that it had prohibited U.S. government agencies and contractors the ability to use LLAMA for military purposes, although on Tuesday Meta published a blog post saying it had dropped that prohibition. Allowing the US Military to use Lamar might not be enough to mollify Meta's critics on this issue. Trump is anti China and has historically restricted exports of technology such as encryption software, drones and semiconductors. The Biden administration increased those restrictions on technology. It's hard to imagine Trump would agree to let China gain access to state of the art AI models. Already OpenAI, Anthropic and other proprietary software makers have said governments should regulate the most capable AI models so bad actors can't easily use them. And Anthropic has explicitly opposed open source AI over safety concerns Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, for his part, argued in a July blog post that our adversaries are great at espionage. Stealing models that fit on a thumb drive is relatively easy, and most tech companies are far from operating in a way that would make this more difficult. That's a tough argument to make with the national security establishment. Even if he's right, much could depend on who advises Trump on AI policy. For instance, his vice president elect, J.D. vance, has spoken out in support of open source AI in the past, arguing that the technology will prevent crazy people from using AI to propagate left wing bias. Trump has also said that he'd ask open source proponent Elon Musk for advice on tech policy. At the end of the day, though, it's unclear how much influence the two will actually have on Trump's policy. And even if Trump does crack down on open source AI, all hope might not be lost for Meta. After all, it could always choose to simply make its LLAMA models closed source. In doing so, though, Meta will be entering the tight race between proprietary model developers without two of its major advantages, the benefit llama users receive from having full control over the model, and the halo effect Meta gets from framing itself as a crusader for everyday developers.

All right, back to real me Once again, Stephanie here is identifying that there are geopolitical implications and that the foreign and trade policy that Trump wants to pursue vis a vis China is going to have a deterministic impact on how he and his White House think about artificial intelligence. What's different about where she's going with this is the open source AI implications. One of the big points of opposition to California's SB 1047 was, of course, the unintended potential consequences for open source AI. But is that going to run up against China policy? There are a lot of ways that this could play out, and some fairly significant tensions and push and pull from both sides. Now, if you are left feeling at the end of all three of these reads that we just don't know what.

AI is going to look like under.

Trump, at least not when it comes to the specifics. It's because, of course, we don't.

What is clear, though, is that this.

Will be a major issue for this next administration. It'll be a national security issue, a trade policy issue, an economic competitiveness issue, an energy issue. And so you better believe that from here on out, I'm going to be spending a lot more time trying to understand how the broader Trump camp thinks about these things and what it might.

Mean for this industry as a whole.

For now, though, that is going to do it for today's AI Daily Brief. Appreciate you listening as always. And until next time.

Peace.

Sam.