2024 is a busy year for parliamentary membership (and PEBOBY) AI – Especially in California, where is Galin Newsom Sign up for a new AI Law while the AI profile is high. And 2025 can see many activities, especially at the country level, according to Mark Weatherford. Weatherford already, in words, see “creating a sausage of wisdom and rules” in both countries and federal levels; He served as the head of the security office of information for the state of California and Colorado, as well as Vice Security Saber Secretary at President Barack Obama. Weatherford says the last year, he has a different job title, but the body is usually to know “how can we raise the security of security and about the privacy of how to influence how policies are made.” The final summons, he joined the Gretel synthetic data company is a representative of Privacy President and standard. So, I love talking to her about what you thought it would come in the AI Rules and why they think that the country will lead. This interview has been revised so long and simplicity. The purpose of racing the conversation levels may be compatible with many people in the technology industry, which may have readers of the congratulation syncs of social media or topic, see what some officials selected know and do not know. . How much optimistically optimistic is the parliamentary member can get the context you need to make a decision about regulations? Yes, I’m very sure that he could come there. That I was less confident that the timeline came out. You know, AI changes every day. I think that the problem is saying only last month has developed more. So I believe that the government will come, but he needs a guidance, give employees, teach. Earlier this week, the US Representative Council has a period of assignment that is about a year ago, a task force about artificial intelligence, and he release report – also, it takes a year to do this. It’s report 230 pages; I’m across now. [Weatherford and I first spoke in December.]
[When it comes to] Create a sausage of wisdom and rule, you have two different Partisan organizations, and they try to come together and do something that makes everyone happy, which means everything will be watered down just a little bit. It only takes a long time, and now, when we go to the new administration, it’s all in the air about how a certain attention will be done or not. It seems like your point of view may see more regulations to the state level at 2025 instead of the Federal level. True doing? I really believe. I mean, in California, I think the Governor [Gavin] Newsdom, just a few months ago, entered 12 laws associated with AI. [Again, it’s 18 by TechCrunch’s count.)] She veto a great bill in AI, which will require ai company to invest more in tests and gently. In fact, I told you the Sacramento in California cybersecurity Education Summit, and I said a little about the law that happened in all the US, and as much as much of 400 different laws. The level of the country has been introduced only in the past 12 months. So there are many things that are happening there. And I am one of the great concerns, it is a big concern in technology in general, and in cybersecurity, but we see it along the current form of artificial, it is a terms of harmonization. Harmonization is the word that [the Department of Homeland Security] and Harry Coker in [Biden] The White House has been used for [refer to]: How to sync all the rules and regulations on the variety of this variety so we do not have this [situation] Every person performs its own work, which makes the company crazy. Because then they should figure out, how they comply with all these different laws and regulations in different countries? I think there will be more activity on the country side, and may we interpret this so that there is no variety of regulations to be made company. I have not heard the terms, but this would be the next question: I imagine most people would agree that the harmonation is a good purpose, but what is the mechanism that happened? What is the incentive to do with the country-states to ensure that the law and their health is in accordance with each other? Honestly, there is no many incentives to slapy the regulations, unless I can see the language they appear in different countries – that for me, showing that they all see what each other. But from the point of fact, like, “let’s take a strategic plan to this between all countries,” who will never happen, I do not have high hope for it. Do you think other countries follow the California leader about the general approach? Many people do not like to hear this, but California is so pushing the envelope [in tech legislation] That helps people come together, because they do all heavy lifts, they do a lot of work to do the research that goes into some of their rules. 12 bills passed by the governor newsom on the map, all of the pornography to use data to train websites to different things. He has been complete enough about leaning forward there. Although my understanding is that they go through a more targeted special steps and then the larger regulations you get attention, Governor Newsom finally veto. I can see both sides from it. There is a privacy component that drives bills at first, but you should consider the cost to do that, and the requirements that apply to artificial intelligence companies to be innovative. So there is a balance there. I will expect [in 2025] That California will pass something little more tight than what they did [in 2024]. And your understanding of the federal level, there is always an interest, like a house report you mention, but don’t have to be a great priority or we will see the main law next year? Well I don’t know. It depends on how many emphasis on [new] Congress brings to me we will see. I mean, you read what I read, and what I read is to be an emphasis on low regulations. But technology in many aspects, it is supposed about privacy and Suber’s security, this is a problem of bipartisan, good for everyone. I’m not a bigger fan of the law, there are many duplications and many are wasted power resources that happen with rules so many different rules. But at the same time, when the safety and community security are efforted, like AI, I think, there are certain places for more regulations. You are the matter of bipartisan. My sense is that there is a split, not certainly can be predicted – not only all the voice of the Republic of all Democrats. That’s a good point. The geography is important, whether we like to admit or not, and therefore places like California is so progressive in some law compared to some other countries. Obviously, this area that the Gretel works, but it seems like believing, or the company believes, if there are more commandments, pushes industries in the other synthetic data direction. Perhaps. One of the reasons I am here, I am sure of synthetic data as the future AI. Without data, no AI, and the quality of data is a problem, due to data collection – can be used or shrinking. There will be more and more than necessary for high quality synthetic data that guarantees the privacy and eliminate all kinds of nontepnical, soft problems. We believe that synthetic data is an answer. In fact, I’m 100% sure. This is less than policy, even though I feel implications of policy, but I like to hear more about what you bring you to the point of view. I think there are others who know the problem you use, but think about synthetic data that can add bias or any issues in the original data, rather than solving the problem. Of course, it is a technical part of the conversation. Our customers feel that they are solving the problem, and there are a bad data flywheel concept, it will be worse and it will be worse, but it builds the flywheel that proves the data not. So worse, that remains the same or better every time fly will come. The Gretel problem has been solved. Many figures that are in accordance with Trump in Silicon Valley has reminded “sensor” AI – a variety of weights and fences inserts the company created by a generative manufacture. Do you think that would be adjusted? What do you need? About the concern about the AI sensor, the Government has some administrative lever that can be pulled, and if there is a risk that is perceived to the public, almost will act. However, finding a sweet spot between enough content moderation and restrictive sensors will be challenging. The coming rule is clear that the “lesser regulatory” will be the modus operandi, to be through an official legislation or an executive command such as [National Institute of Standards and Technology] Guidelines and frames or statements together through the coordination of the Institution, we have to expect some guidance. I want to go back to this question about a good diger’s regulation. There is a big spread of how people say about AI, such will save this world or will ruin the world, which is the most awesome technology, or overhyped. There are many different opinions about potential technology and risk. How a single piece of a single or even many pieces of ai’s regulation includes? I think we should be very careful about managing AI sprawl. We have seen your deepfakes and some very negative aspects, to see young children now in high school and even younger schools that make a fake fake that creates a law with law. So I think there is a place for a law that controls how artificial intelligence does not breach what you can – we create a new law that strengthening the law now, but only takes AI components. I think of us – we have been in the technology space – everything has to remember, many of these items are just considered to be different for us, when I talk to family members and some unsaid friends. Technology, literally no clue what I’m talking about most of the time. We do not want someone to feel that the government is too large to manage, but it is important to talk about it speaks of non-technology. But on the other hand, you might be able to say just from talking to me, I’m confused about the future AI. I saw a lot of goodness to come. I think we will have several years of bumpy as it is more in accordance with and more know, and the law will have a place there, so they both know what AI means to them and put some guardrails. up around AI.
